i 
 
 P. 
 
 \k 
 
 
 
 ■ \ 
 
 / i ■ 
 
 
 ^f.y 
 
 V. 
 
 -'.i 
 
 
 ■\h 
 
LIBRARY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 University of California. 
 
 Mrs. SARAH P. WALSWORTH. 
 
 Received October, 1894, 
 Accessions No.^^i/^/S^. Class No. 
 
 l^/KOm^^ 
 
 /?V'^yrv^9...9Vu(i) 
 
A SYNOPSIS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 MORAL THEOLOGY OF PETER DENS, 
 
 AS PREPARED FOR THE USE OF 
 
 ROMISH SEMINARIES 
 
 AND 
 
 STUDENTS OF THEOLOGY. 
 
 TRANSLATED 
 
 BHOM THE LATIN OF THE MECHLIN EDITION OF 1838. 
 
 BY JOSEPH F. BERG, 
 
 FORMERLY PROFESSOR OF LATIN AND GREEK IN 
 MARSHALL COLLEGE. 
 
 FOURTH EDITION. 
 
 PHILADELPHIA: 
 LIPPINCOTT, GRAMBO & CO. 
 
 1855. 
 
iTjm^' 
 
 Entered according to the act of congress, in the year 1841, by Joseph 
 F. Berg, in the office of the clerk of the district court of the United 
 States in and for the eastern district of Pennsylvania. 
 
 J. FAGAN, STEREOTYPER. 
 
ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 I CERTIFY, that the extracts from the " Moral The- 
 ology of Peter Dens," translated by the Rev. J. F. 
 Berg, have been compared by me with the original 
 Latin, and that I have been unable to discover any 
 error. They are faithfully rendered into English; 
 and in idiomatic sentences the sense is strictly pre- 
 served. The paragraphs or lines under quotation 
 marks are literal translations; those not so marked 
 give the sense, or the sense abbreviated, where the 
 detail at large might not be equally interesting. And 
 thus the title of this work is maintained throughout, 
 " A Synopsis of the Moral Theology of Peter Dens.'* 
 It is such a translation or Synopsis, however, as fully 
 warrants our congratulating the English reader, as he 
 may now thus readily possess the means of ascertain- 
 ing what are the doctrines and peculiar tenets of the 
 Roman Church ; and that too from a work authorized 
 and sanctioned as orthodox by the Hierarchy itself. — 
 Thus "fas est doceri ab hoste;" beyond which, in 
 this case, there is no appeal. 
 
 S. E. PARKER. 
 
 The Author is the more fortunate in securing this en- 
 dorsement of the correctness of his translation, as Mr. 
 Parker is the person whom Mr. Hughes designated as an 
 umpire in a dispute relative to the translation of a Latin 
 quotation, in the course of his controversy with the late 
 Dr. Breckenridge. 
 
J^3 7- 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 It has long been the desire of the Protestant public 
 that general access might be obtained to the Moral 
 Theology of Peter Dens ; and ever since my attention 
 has been more directly called to the Romish contro- 
 versy, my mind has been impressed with the impor- 
 tance of the v^ork, which I have at length undertaken. 
 Owing to the pressing duties incident to an extensive 
 pastoral charge, the translation has hitherto progressed 
 but slowly ; and I have frequently been constrained to 
 leave it untouched for weeks at a time. Years would 
 probably have elapsed before the manuscript could 
 have been put into the printer's hands, if I had defer- 
 red the publication until the completion of the whole 
 work, as it will require no small amount of labour to 
 prepare a synopsis from seven closely printed volumes 
 of from 500 to 600 pages each, with annotations, &c. 
 Protestant ministers have frequently urged me to the 
 work which I have commenced, by reminding me of 
 the important service which a book of this kind would 
 render to them, when attempting to expose the mon- 
 strous errors and strong delusions of the Church of 
 Rome. Dens' Theology has long been a text-book in 
 Popish Seminaries on the continent of Europe, and in 
 Ireland especially, from which country our largest 
 importations of priests are made ; and I consider my- 
 self providentially favoured in having procured from 
 Germany, through the intervention of a friend, the late 
 
 (3) 
 
 ritv/^ 
 
IV PREFACE. 
 
 Mechlin edition of 1838. The copy in my possession 
 is from the Archbishop's own press, and is therefore 
 stamped with all the authority which the most scru- 
 pulous and fastidious Romanist could desire. The 
 work in question is necessarily accessible to few, both 
 on account of the high price, and the extreme diffi- 
 culty of procuring a copy; and even were these impe-_ 
 diments to an extensive circulation removed, it would 
 still be covered with a Latin veil, which must screen 
 it effectually from the eyes of all, except the learned. 
 If I had been writing a book merely for Protestant 
 ministers, I should probably have contented myself 
 with a simple translation ; but as I know the common 
 people, both Protestant and Papist, will read it, I have 
 thought it best to furnish the antidote with the poison. 
 For the correctness of my translation, I can and 
 shall, at the proper time and place, present the most 
 satisfactory vouchers. In preparing my remarks, I 
 have conscientiously adhered to what I firmly believe 
 to be the truth; and I am persuaded that no one, 
 whether friend or foe, can prove that any of my state- 
 ments of facts or doctrines have been warped by pre- 
 judice. When 1 can approve a sentiment of Peter 
 Dens, I will do it, not for the love of Popery how- 
 ever, but for the love of God's truth ; but when I find 
 doctrines that are an abomination before God and man, 
 no consideration shall hinder me from reprobating 
 them as they deserve. 
 
 I am well aware that it is a common thing for 
 Popish priests to deny the authority of any works, even 
 though published by their most approved authors, when- 
 ever citations are made from them in illustration of 
 the peculiarities of their system. But if they say that 
 
PREFACE. V 
 
 the Church is not responsible for the theological opi- 
 nions of private individuals in her communion, be they 
 Archbishops, Bishops, or Priests, how can they pre- 
 tend that their church is always " free from pernicious 
 errors," and how will they dare to teach again the 
 words of their authorized catechism, in which they at- 
 tempt to prove their infallibility by such arguments as 
 the following 1 
 
 1. " Because as we have seen above, from Matt. xvi. 
 18. our Lord Jesus Christ, who cannot tell us a lie, 
 has promised, that his church should be built upon a 
 rock, proof against all floods and storms, like the 
 house of the wise builder, of whom he speaks. Matt, 
 vii. 25, and that the gates of hell, that is, the powers 
 of darkness, should not prevail against it. Therefore, 
 the Church of Christ could never cease to be holy in 
 her doctrines, and could never fall into idolatry, super- 
 stition, or any heretical errors whatsoever. 
 
 2. " Because Christ, who is the way, the truth, and 
 the life, John xiv. 6, has promised. Matt, xxviii. 19, 20, 
 to the pastors and teachers of his church, to be with 
 them always, even to the end of the icorld. Therefore 
 
 THEY COULD NEVER GO ASTRAY BY PERNICIOUS ERRORS. 
 
 For how could they go out of the right way of truth 
 and life, who are assured to have always in their com- 
 pany, for their guide. Him, who is the way, the truth, 
 and the life 1 
 
 3. "Because our Lord has promised to the same 
 teachers, John xiv. 16, 17, * I will pray to the Father, 
 and he will give you another comforter, that he may 
 abide with you for ever, even the Spirit of Truth :' 
 and, V. 26, he assures them that this Spirit of Truth 
 'will teach them all things:' and chap. xvi. 13, that 
 
 1# 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 he * shall guide them into all truth.' How then could 
 it be possible that the whole body of these pastors 
 AND teachers of the church, who, by virtue of these 
 pronnises, were to be for ever guided into all truth, by 
 the Spirit of truth, should at any time fall from the 
 truth by errors in faith ?" &c. 
 
 How then, I ask, could it be possible that Peter 
 Dens, who had received the Holy Spirit by the impo- 
 sition of the Bishop's hands at his ordination, " should 
 at any time fall from the truth by errors in faith ?" 
 And how is it possible that the Archbishop, who has 
 given to the world the late edition of Dens' Moral 
 Theology, revised and corrected, and who has en- 
 dorsed and amended it, should have fallen " from the 
 truth by errors in faith," especially when it is remem- 
 bered that extraordinary spiritual gifts and illumina- 
 tion must have been conferred upon him during his 
 passage from one ecclesiastical dignity to another? 
 
 The whole body of pastors and teachers who have 
 received the promise of the infallible guidance of the 
 Holy Spirit, can, of course, not be preserved from er- 
 ror, unless this promise is verified in each individual 
 member. If one may err in matters of faith, two may 
 do the same, and if two, then twenty, and so — a hun- 
 dred or more, until the whole body may finally aposta- 
 tize from the faith. Hence we see the firm foundation 
 upon which the orthodoxy of the Archbishop and his 
 favourite theologian is based. 
 
 Surely, we shall not be told that the Spirit of Truth, 
 (whose infallible direction in matters of faith the 
 priests of Rome claim for themselves as accredited 
 pastors and teachers,) can possibly teach one doctrine 
 in Europe and its opposite in America ! No ! no ! 
 
PREFACE. vii 
 
 The ever-blessed Spirit will never accommodate him- 
 self to the variations of Popery, for he is what the 
 Church of Rome falsely claims to be, " always and 
 everywhere the same" in the lessons of eternal truth, 
 which he inculcates. The claim to purity of doctrine, 
 to freedom from " pernicious errors," which is so 
 strenuously advocated by the friends. of Romanism, 
 will, therefore, appear to be what it really is, a mon- 
 strous, absurd, arid preposterous delusion, when the 
 morals inculcated in some parts of Dens' System of 
 Theology are compared with the pure teachings of the 
 Holy Spirit, as they shine upon the pages of God's 
 blessed word. 
 
 I have marked with quotation signs every passage 
 which purports to be as literal a translation of the ori- 
 ginal Latin, as idiom will allow. Where quotation 
 signs are omitted, I have merely given the sense of the 
 more important paragraphs, and have endeavoured to 
 condense as much as possible. I have been careful to 
 avoid making garbled extracts ; and I certainly should 
 deem it a misfortune if I had, in any instance, unwit- 
 tingly perverted a sentiment by detaching it from its 
 connection. If any such error should- be detected, it 
 will give me pleasure to make the correction, it will 
 be observed that my own remarks are distinguished 
 from the Synopsis and Translation by the difference 
 of the type. 
 
 I ask a candid and prayerful perusal of the follow- 
 ing pages from those individuals in the communion of 
 the Church of Rome, who are not to be deterred by 
 any human interdict from examining for themselves 
 the grounds of their hope of everlasting happiness. 
 I beseech them to pause before they condemn ; I pray 
 
Vill PREFACE. 
 
 them to turn " to the law and to the testimony." " If 
 / speak not according to this word, it is because there 
 is no light in me ;" but if I have the Bible on my side, 
 though " traditions" be against me, all the principali- 
 ties and powers of earth cannot controvert God's truth 
 successfully until they have overturned his throne ! 
 To the Bible I appeal, and by the light of this precious 
 book, I desire to be guided in all my inquiries after 
 truth. 
 
 I shall probably be accused again, as I have been 
 heretofore, of bearing ill-will to Romanists ; and the 
 publication of this work will perhaps be resolved into 
 a malicious disposition to mortify and perplex persons 
 of a different religious creed from myself ; but this sin 
 will be laid to my charge most unjustly. I can fear- 
 lessly appeal to all who know me ; and they will tes- 
 tify that, both in public and in private, I have uniformly 
 treated the private members of the Romish church 
 with kindness and respect ; and the Searcher of Hearts 
 knows that I do most heartily desire that even the bit- 
 terest enemies of the Lord Jesus Christ may come to 
 the knowledge of the truth and be saved. But this I 
 avow, and this, in the face of heaven, I shall ever be 
 ready to proclaim, — I hate Popery ! I do hate it with 
 a perfect hatred ! and whilst God gives me life and 
 strength, I shall exert all the power and influence 
 which his providence and grace afford me, to warn 
 and guard my fellow-men against its insidious errors 
 and its strong delusions. 
 
 J. F. B. 
 
 Philadixphia, September 1, 1841. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Page 
 
 Mortal and Venial Sin 13 
 
 CHAPTER n. 
 The Precepts of the Church ' 19 
 
 CHAPTER HI. 
 Infidels and Heretics subject to the Law. 21 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 Just Men subject to the Law 24 
 
 . * CHAPTER V. 
 The Clergy subject to the Law 26 
 
 CHAPTER VL 
 The Decalogue and the First and Second Commandments. . . 30 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 The Third Commandment of the Decalogue 34 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 The Fourth Precept of the Decalogue .41 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 Concerning Grace .'......, 48 
 
 (9) 
 
X CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 Concerning Justification '. 57 
 
 CHAPTER XL 
 Concerning Merit 74 
 
 CHAPTER Xn. 
 Concerning Theological Virtues 81 
 
 CHAPTER Xni. 
 Division of Faith 85 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 Articles of Faith 91 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 Vices opposed to the Faith 104 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 Concerning Blasphemy 118 
 
 CHAPTER XVn. 
 Rules of Faith 122 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 Traditions, and their divisions 152 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 The Church 164 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 The Marks of the Church 169 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 The Infallibility of the Church. . . . .• 189 
 
CONTENTS. Xi 
 
 CHAPTER XXII. 
 Ecclesiastical Councils. 206 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 The Supreme Pontiff 217 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 The Successor of Peter in the Primacy 231 
 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 Theft and Rapine '. 247 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 Of Suicide 262 
 
 CHAPTER XXVII. 
 Of Homicide and Seduction 270 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 Virtue of Religion 292 
 
 ■ I CHAPTER XXIX. 
 The Sign of the Cross 308 
 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 Magic 312 
 
 CHAPTER XXXI. 
 Lying and its division 316 
 
 CHAPTER XXXTI. 
 Fasting and its division 321 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIII. 
 Worship and Invocation of Saints , 34? 
 
Xll CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIV. 
 The Sacraments 356 
 
 CHAPTER XXXV. 
 The Sacrament of Baptism 369 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVI. 
 The Sacrament of Confirmation 389 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVII. 
 * The adorable Sacrament of the Eucharist . . 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVIII. 
 The Sacrifice of the Mass 414 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIX. 
 The Sacrament of Penance 438 
 
 CHAPTER XL. 
 Treatise concerning Indulgences 479 
 
 CHAPTER XLI. 
 The Sacrament of Extreme Unction 489 
 
 CHAPTER XLII. 
 The Sacrament of Orders 496 
 
 CHAPTER XLIII. 
 Concerning Marriage 497 
 
 CHAPTER XLIV. 
 Concerning Antichrist 501 
 
SYNOPSIS OF DENS' THEOLOGY, 
 
 CHAPTER I. . . 
 
 CONCERNING MORTAL AND VENIAL SIN. 
 [No. 153. Vol. I.] 
 Concerning Mortal Sin, 
 
 " What is mortal sin ? 
 
 " I. R. It is that, which of itself entails spiritual death 
 upon the soul. Inasmuch as it necessarily deprives the soul 
 of sanctifying grace, and charity, in which the spiritual life 
 of the soul consists. 
 
 " II. The death of the soul, therefore, which mortal sin 
 induces, is not natural death : because in this sense, the soul 
 is immortal : but spiritual, consisting in the privation of sanc- 
 tifying grace." 
 
 [No. 154.] 
 
 Concerning Venial Sin. 
 
 " What is venial sin ? 
 
 " I. That which does not entail spiritual death upon the 
 soul — or that which does wt avert from the ultimate end," 
 (i.e. which does not create aversion to God), "or which is 
 only slightly repugnant to the right order of reason. 
 
 " Is there any such thing as venial sin? 
 
 " II. Calvin taught, that all sins are, from their nature, 
 mortal, and worthy of eternal punishment, J)ut that they are 
 not imputed to believers : so that, according to himself, the 
 sins of believers may be called venial, inasmuch as they are 
 not imputed to them, on account of their condition ; but not 
 in the sense, as though of themselves they were not worthy 
 of eternal nunishmeiit. 
 
 (13) 
 
14 MORTAL AND VENIAL SIN. 
 
 " III. Approximating to this, is the error of Bajus and a 
 few others, who likewise taught that no sin is from its nature 
 venial ; and they differed from Calvin only in this, that they 
 said some sins were venial from divine mercy, whilst Calvin 
 sought this from the condition of sinners. The error of 
 Bajus is published in this his 20th proposition. " No sin is 
 from its nature venial, but all sin deserves eternal punish- 
 ment." 
 
 *' IV. Hence it is certain that not only from the divine mer- 
 cy, but from the nature of the case, there are venial sins ; 
 or (sins) so trivial that they are consistent in just persons 
 with a state of grace, and the friendship of God. 
 
 " This is proved from the Holy Scripture. In Prov. xxiv. 
 16.it is said, "The just man falleth seven times:" and 
 James iii. 2. " In many things we offend all :" which pas- 
 sages are understood concerning just men. Besides, Matt. 
 vii. 5. certain sins are compared to a mote (or little splinter) ; 
 " and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of 
 thy brother's eye;" and 1 Cor. iii. 12. to wood, hay, and 
 stubble ; " But if any one shall build upon this foundation — 
 wood, hay, stubble." Therefore these sins are from their 
 nature light or venial. See other passages from Scripture 
 and the Holy Fathers, in relation to this subject, in Estius, 
 2 dist. 42. § 4. It is proved also from reason : in all inter- 
 course certain light offences occur, which do not dissolve 
 friendship ; therefore, also, there are such in the fellowship 
 and friendship, which man has with God. Farther, every 
 sin does not create aversion to God : therefore every sin is 
 not mortal. 
 
 " ObJ. I. Christ says. Matt. v. 19. 'Whosoever shall 
 break one of the least of these 'commandments — shall be 
 called least in the kingdom of heaven ;' therefore the trans- 
 gression of the least command is mortal. 
 
 " Ans. We deny the inference : for these commandments 
 are called least only in accordance with the false opinion of 
 the Pharisees ; but in themselves they were important, whe- 
 ther with Augustine you refer the words of Christ to the 
 preceding, or with Chrysostom to the subsequent things, such 
 as anger, injury, &c. 
 
 " ObJ. it. Christ says to Peter, John iii. 8. " If I do not 
 wash thee, thou hast no part with me ;" therefore, &c. 
 
MORTAL AND VENIAL SIN. 15 
 
 "ilrts. We deny the inference: because the refusal of Peter, 
 which had preceded, was either no sin, or at least did not 
 exceed a venial offence, but if a refusal had foHowed the 
 severe reproof of Christ, it would have been a grievous sin 
 of disobedience. 
 
 " Olj. III. Venial sin is not remitted, except through the 
 mercy of God ; therefore, this being set aside, it merits eter- 
 nal punishment. 
 
 "A?is. Although the remission of venial sin be through the 
 mercy of God, yet it is in a measure due to a just man, who 
 seeks it ; for venial sin does not destroy the divine friend- 
 ship, nor does it destroy the principle of recovering from the 
 offence. 
 
 " Ohj. IV. Venial sin is a greater evil than eternal punish- 
 ment, according to No. 149 ; therefore it merits this penalty. 
 
 " Ans, We deny the inference. Venial sin is indeed a 
 greater evil in regard to the wrong, as it is an offence 
 against the virtue of God, whereas the punishment would be 
 only against the comfort of nature : but it is not a greater 
 evil in respect of demerit ; thus therefore eternal punishment 
 is due to mortal sin alone. See these things more at large 
 in Sylvius & Wiggers." 
 
 Our theologian has not been very happy in his selection 
 of proof texts. It is very true " a just man fallelh seven 
 times," but Solomon adds what Peter Dens omits, " and 
 RisETH UP AGAIN." And how does he rise up again ? He 
 remembers, whence he is fallen, and repents and does his 
 first works. H6 looks to the blood of Christ for pardon, 
 and God accepts him. This distinguishes the just man from 
 the hypocrite and the sinner, who fall till seventy times seven, 
 and do not " rise up again," but sink to one depth of degra- 
 dation afler another, until they fall into the perdition of the 
 ungodly. The just man is accepted afler falling, not because 
 his dereliction was venial, but because he has risen up and 
 fled to Christ for pardon. But James says, " In many things 
 we offend all.' Yes — truly — and therefore the importance 
 of the Christian's being careful not to pass undue censure 
 
 
16 MORTAL AND VENIAL SIN. 
 
 Upon others, and to bridle his tongue. The consideration 
 that " in many things we offend all," is stated in this con- 
 nexion to humble us, not to encourage men in sin. But if 
 " we offend in many things" and are still accepted, are not 
 these offences venial ? Not more so than any other sins. 
 They must be remitted through the virtue of that blood, 
 which cleanseth from all sin, or we cannot be accepted, but 
 must perish — " The soul that sinneth it shall die." 
 
 But some sins are compared to a mote, i. e. when, con- 
 trasted with other offences, their guilt appears comparatively 
 small. 
 
 Christ in this passage, Matt. vii. 5, is rebuking the hypo- 
 crisy of those who, whilst they make great pretensions to 
 sanctity, are themselves guilty in a far greater degree of the 
 very offences which they condemn in others ; they officiously 
 proffer their services to extract the splinter from a brother's 
 eye, whilst there is a whole beam in their own eye. This 
 does not prove that some sins are venial, but it shows con- 
 clusively that the guilt of some men is greater than that of 
 others. A splinter in the eye will destroy the vision as 
 effectually as a whole beam, and the soul will be as cer- 
 tainly destroyed by the commission of one act of deliberate 
 hostility against God, as by the perpetration of a thousand 
 crimes. A ship will as infallibly sink through the careless- 
 ness of the crew in neglecting a single leak, as though its 
 keel were perforated with a thousand holes. 
 
 But where is the justice of God, if all sins are to be pun- 
 ished alike, whilst they differ in the degree of their guilt ? 
 God will punish with eternal death all sin, all deliberate 
 transgression, which has not been pardoned for the sake of 
 the Lord Jesus Christ. But some sinners will sink to a 
 lower hell than others, as Christ plainly intimated when he 
 told the Pharisees, " Ye shall receive the greater damnation." 
 The drunkard, who dies in a fit of mania-a-potu, perishes, 
 for "drunkards shall not inherit the kingdom of God ;". but 
 
MORTAL AND VENIAL SIN. 17 
 
 the man who, for the sake of filthy lucre, pampered the 
 cravings of his victim's appetite for strong drink, when he 
 dies in his sins, " receives the greater damnation." 
 
 The poor Papist, who is devoted to the superstitious rites 
 of his religion, and who trusts his salvation to the efficacy 
 of penances and alms and masses, will perish unless he re- 
 pent — but the priest, who taught him to deny the Lord that 
 bought him, and perverted his reason by sophistry and false- 
 hood, will receive the greater damnation, — ^The Judge of 
 all the earth will do right. 
 
 As for the allusion to 1 Cor. iii. 12. it is as jejune and in- 
 appropriate as an unapt quotation well can be. " If any one 
 shall build upon this foundation, — wood, hay, stubble, if any 
 man's work shall be burnt, he shall suffer loss, but he him- 
 self shall be saved ; yet so as by fire." As this Scripture 
 is forced in as a proof text to sustain the Romish distinction 
 between venial and mortal sins, I suppose the man's venial 
 sins are to be burnt, and thus he is to suffer loss. Good 
 riddance surely I But he himself shall be saved, yet so as 
 by fire. Of course by the fires of purgatory. 
 
 The doctrine which is so prominently taught in the stand- 
 ards of the Romish church of the distinction between mortal 
 and venial sin, is prima facie evidence, that the whole system 
 is directly at variance with the Word of God. Sin in every 
 form and degree is the abominable thing which He hates. 
 The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all un- 
 righteousness. Fallen man in the pride of his selfish heart 
 graduates the degrees of guilt attached to various crimes, 
 according to the extent to which they affect his comfort and 
 security in this world. Thus, thefl and murder are great 
 sins, but profanity and Sabbath-breaking are little sins, be- 
 cause the latter do not so immediately trench upon the 
 rights and interests of society. But God judges by another 
 rule. He looks at the heart, and in the enmity of the car- 
 nal mind he sees the secret fountain, from which all the 
 
18 MORTAL AND VENIAL SIN. 
 
 streams of depravity proceed. This alienation of heart is 
 the sin which he hates — and it is developed as clearly to the 
 eye of God in the most secret thoughts, and the most trifling 
 actions of the unregenerate man, as it is to our view in the 
 most appalling exhibitions of depravity. 
 
 When the Spirit of God has renovated the heart, changed 
 the bias of the will, enlightened the understanding, and 
 nerved us with moral strength, we are minded to obey — it is 
 our meat and our drink to serve God. We cannot sin as 
 the unregenerate do, who hate God with a perfect hatred, 
 though we may be overtaken in a fault ; we may fall as 
 many of the mighty have done, but we believe that though 
 the just man fall seven times, he will rise up again, fly to 
 Christ for pardon, and finally be accepted in the beloved — 
 not because any, or the least of his sins were venial, but be- 
 cause the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin. 
 
 Our limits will not permit us to follow the author through 
 the intricacies of his nice distinctions between mortal and 
 venial sin. Suffice it to say, that there are no less than 
 twenty-one numbers or chapters relating to this subject. The 
 156th No. commences with the following words : 
 
 " Although mortal sin is far removed from venial, it is ex- 
 tremely difficult to discover, and very dangerous to define, 
 which is mortal, and which venial ; so that these are mat- 
 ters which ought to be considered not by a human, but a 
 divine mind, as Enchiridius remarks," &c. 
 
 After this statement, we know not whether most to admire 
 the theological acumen or the modesty of the author, por- 
 trayed in the twenty chapters, which immediately succeed 
 this avowal of the difficulty and danger of the enterprise. 
 The reader would probably be very little edified by a perusal 
 of Peter Dens' theological prose relative to such points as 
 " The difference between mortal and venial sin," "Rules for 
 distinguishing mortal sih from venial," &c., " The ways in 
 
PRECEPTS OF THE CHURCH. 19 
 
 which mortal sin becomes venial, and in which venial be- 
 comes mortal," &c. 
 
 In the treatise concerning conscience which succeeds the 
 disquisition on mortal and venial sin, the following subjects 
 are discussed : " Rules of human actions." " Definition of 
 conscience." " Division of conscience." " Of acting against 
 conscience." " Of acting according to conscience." " The 
 mode of deposing an erroneous conscience." *' The safe 
 rule of action." " Of the conscience, which is the safe rule 
 of acting." " Of conduct, which is safe, safer, and not so 
 safe." "Doubtful conscience." "Perplexed conscience." 
 " Of probability." " Probable conscience." " Of opinions 
 more probable but less safe." " Of the most probable opin- 
 ion." "Scrupulous conscience." "The causes of scru- 
 ples." " Remedies of scruples." " The confessor of the 
 scrupulous," — i. e. how the confessor ought to proceed with 
 a scrupulous person. It will be apparent from the preceding 
 captions that there is a considerable assortment of conscience 
 offered to the faithful, and he must be very fastidious, who 
 cannot be accommodated. 
 
 CHAPTER 11. 
 
 [No. 23. Vol. II.] 
 
 Concerning the Precepts of the Church. 
 
 " I. Precepts of the church necessary to be known are 
 five. 
 
 " What are the principal precepts of the church, concern- 
 ing all Christ's faithful? 
 
 " I. Although the precepts of the church are very numer- 
 ous, both in canon law, and in councils and constitutions of 
 
20 PRECEPTS OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 the Popes, yet five are specially propounded in the catechisms 
 as necessary to be known and observed by all : they are the 
 following ; 
 
 *' II. 1 . Celebrate the festivals appointed by the church. 
 
 *' 2. On festivals reverently hear the sacred" office of the 
 
 " 3. Observe the fasts appointed on certain days, and ab- 
 stinence from some kinds of food. 
 
 *' 4. Confess your sins every year to your own priest, or 
 to another with his permission. 
 
 "5. Receive the most holy Eucharist, at least once a 
 year, and that about Easter." ***** 
 
 This is the Papist's way of salvation ; by these meritori- 
 ous works, heaven is secured to all the faithful ! , It may 
 well be questioned whether another system of delusion could 
 be invented, which would at once more effectually lead cap- 
 tive the carnal mind and gratify the natural, self-righteous- 
 ness of the human heart. The observance of these five 
 precepts constitutes a good Catholic, and an heir of ever- 
 lasting life ! It is beneath sober demonstration to show that 
 a sinner may observe these five precepts and five thousand 
 more of the same kind, and yet be an utter stranger to the 
 renewing grace of God. Or, are we to suppose that regen- 
 eration consists in obedience to these five rules ? If so, 
 show us a single one of them in the Bible ; or point out even 
 in the corrupted Doway version the authority upon which 
 these five precepts are based. You look for them in vain in 
 God's word — and no wonder, for they are inventions of the 
 Man of Sin. 
 
INFIDELS AND HERETICS. 21 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 [No. 27. Vol. II.] 
 
 Concerning Injidels and Heretics subject to the Lmo. 
 
 " I. Injidels are not hound hy the laws of the church, 
 II. Heretics, c^c, are bound by them. III. Whether it is 
 lawful to give meats to heretics on a fast day. 
 
 "Are infidels and heretics bound by the laws? 
 
 "J.ns. 1. They are all bound by the eternal and natural 
 law, also by positive divine laws. 
 
 " 2. Infidels or unbaptized persons are not held by the posi- 
 tive laws of the church ; because they are not subject to the 
 church ; hence the apostle says, 1 Cor. v. 12. * What have 
 I to do to judge them that are without V 
 
 " It is inferred if such persons eat meats on a day of ec- 
 clesiastical fast, that they do not sin against the law of the 
 church, nor indeed does he who furnishes meats to them ; 
 unless they should eat these meats in contempt of the church. 
 
 " II. 3. Heretics, schismatics, apostates and all such bap- 
 tized persons, are bound by the laws of the church, which 
 concern them : because through baptism they have become 
 subject to the church ; nor are they any more absolved from 
 her laws, than subjects rebelling against their lawful prince 
 (are absolved) from the laws of the prince. 
 
 " Do heretics therefore sin, when they do not observe the 
 fasts and feasts appointed by the church ? ■ 
 
 " Certainly : unless they may be excused for some cause, 
 as for instance, ignorance. 
 
 " ObJ. I. Heretics are not in the church ; therefore they 
 are not subject to the church. 
 
 " Ans. It is true, heretics are not- in the church as to the 
 union of charity and the communion of the saints ; but 
 though they are not in the church as to subjection, on the 
 other hand, by baptism they are subject to the church, and 
 remain personally subject to the church, wherever they may 
 have been. 
 
22 INFIDELS AND HERETICS. 
 
 " Obj. II. The church seems to relax her laws in respect 
 to heretics ; because by urging the observance of the rules 
 she can expect no good effect, but rather sins and offences 
 against God on their part. 
 
 " Ans. We deny the antecedent" — -(viz. that the church 
 seems to relax her laws, &c.) — " the contrary is evident 
 from the mind of the whole church. The church accom- 
 modates herself to their sins only permissively for higher 
 reasons ; lest, for instance, she might appear to the manifest 
 scandal of the faithful to favour heresy, whilst heretics 
 through their obstinacy obtain an advantage, and are freed 
 from the burdens of laws to which the faithful are subjected. 
 Besides the same reason for relaxing (the laws) would hold 
 good for all the evils of Christendom. 
 
 " Is it lawful in this Catholic country to place meats on 
 the table before heretics on holidays or fast days? 
 
 "III. We reply with Daelman and Billuart that this is 
 permitted to tavern-keepers, in the case of those heretics who 
 remain in the country through necessity or some important 
 reason : for the consequences of being in the country must 
 be conceded to those, to whom permission is granted to be 
 in the country : thus meats are sold and given to heretical 
 soldiers in time of war. 
 
 " But if any heretic should be in the country for purposes 
 of pleasure, trade or any other similar cause, it is not 
 thought that any necessity or sufficient cause is afforded ; 
 whence it appears not lawful for innkeepers, much less for 
 others, to place meats before such an one on forbidden days : 
 but they can properly reply to the heretic that they do not 
 prepare meats to be eaten on that day, in accordance with 
 the laws of the church and the customs of the country. 
 
 " The case is different under the government of heretics, 
 when innkeepers give meats to those who ask for them ; be- 
 cause otherwise they might be regarded as disturbers of the 
 republic. See No. 274, on Temperance." 
 
 This is not the place to speak of the peculiarity of the 
 Romish church which Paul describes when he tells of some 
 who shall command to abstain from meats, which God hath 
 created to be received with thanksgiving of them which be- 
 lieve and know the truth." That subject will come up in its 
 
SUBJECT TO THE LAW. 23 
 
 proper place. We shall confine ourselves to the niain ques- 
 tion of the section. It will be seen from the above that Holy 
 Church considers even Protestants as bound to abstain from 
 meats on the fast days appointed by her. We are all bound 
 by her laws forsooth, " because through baptism we have 
 become subject to the church ;" she claims all the jurisdic- 
 tion over us, which she exercises over her own priest-ridden 
 subjects. We are not anv more absolved from her 
 
 LAWS, TUAN REBELLIOUS SUBJECTS ARE ABSOLVED FROM 
 THE LAWS OF THE PRINCE FROM WHOM THEY HAVE RE- 
 VOLTED I 
 
 The arrogance of this dogma would -excite the reader's 
 indignation, if its absurdity did not provoke his ridicule. If 
 Holy Mother should ever regain the influence she has lost, 
 we apprehend some heretics would continue to commit mor- 
 tal sin by secretly eating meat on Friday ; and why should 
 they not ? they might readily avail themselves of the expe- 
 dient, said to have been successfully employed by a Romish 
 priest, whose bowels yearned over a fine roast of beef which 
 had been sent to his Reverence, whether by one of the faith- 
 ful, or by a heretic, we cannot say. The priest was in a 
 dilemma as the present was sent on a Friday, and he was 
 hungry and very partial to beef; he adopted an expedient, 
 however, which extricated him from the difficulty without 
 wounding his conscience. Having procured a fish-hook he 
 took his beef to the river, saying as he let it down into 
 the water, and drew it up, " Go down beef! Come up fish !" 
 The miracle was complete, and the priest eat the beef as fish. 
 To be sure it looked as much like beef and tasted as much 
 like beef as though its nature had not been changed ; but 
 this fact could not possibly disturb the equanimity of a de- 
 vout believer in transubstantiation. Certainly it was as easy 
 for his Reference to change flesh into fish as to change a 
 bit of bread into the body and blood, soul and divinity of 
 the Saviour, by simply saying with the proper intention, 
 " hoc est corpus meum." 
 
 afo^_ 
 
24 JUST MEN SUBJECT TO THE LAW. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 [No. 28. Vol. II.] 
 
 Concerning Just Men subject to the Law. 
 
 " Are just and spiriti>al men subject to the law ? 
 
 " I. Yes : so the Council of Trent has decided. It is 
 proved by the apostle (Rom. xiii. 1.) where he says, " Let 
 every soul be subject to the higher powers," and Heb. xiii. 
 17. " Obey them that have the rule over you and submit 
 yourselves." These texts are general and therefore they 
 include all just men also. 
 
 " Obj. I. Rom. vi. 14, the apostle says to Christians, 
 * Ye are not under the law but under grace ;' therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. The meaning is : Ye are not under the Mosaic 
 law, which has now ceased, but under the grace of the new 
 law. 
 
 " Obj. I. Tim. i. 9, it is said * The law is not made for a 
 righteous man ;' therefore the righteous is not subject to the 
 law. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : the meaning is, that the law 
 is not made for a righteous man, that it may terrify him 
 with threats and punishments, and thus compel him to its 
 observance ; because righteous men observe the law of their 
 own accord ; but it consists with this, that the law is made 
 for the righteous man, in order to his direction. 
 
 " II. It is to be observed, that men may be said to be sub- 
 ject to the law in a twofold manner ; in one way as to pre- 
 ceptive authority, in the other way as to compulsory author- 
 ity ; for in every law two things are to be considered ; one, 
 that the law is a rule of morals, because it shows, directs 
 and obliges ; and these things belong to the preceptive au- 
 thority of the law; the other, because the law imposes or 
 inflicts punishments, and in so far terrifies and compels; 
 which relates to the compulsory power of the law." 
 
LEGISLATOR AS SUBJECT TO THE LAW. 25 
 
 [No. 29.] 
 Concerning the Legislator as subject to the Law, 
 
 " Is the legislator bound by the laws, which he himself 
 has made ? 
 
 " I. If the legislator holds monarchical rule, as the Pope, 
 a king, a bishop, &c., or if he is sole absolute lord, he is 
 not held by his laws as to their compulsory power, but cer- 
 tainly in their preceptive authority, at least indirectly, since 
 the laws equally concern himself and his subjects. 
 
 " II. That he is not held as to their compulsory authority 
 is manifest : because as he is the supreme prince, he can be 
 compelled by none of those to whom the law is directed, to 
 the observance of his own law. 
 
 " III. That he is bound as to their preceptive authority, is 
 proved from this, because right reason dictates, that the 
 head should be conformed to the members. Besides it is 
 proper that a legislator in his own conduct should concur in 
 the common good, and therefore in the observance of his 
 own laws — for as nothing is more injurious than that the 
 legislator should not be the first to observe the law, so no- 
 thing is more beneficial than that he should be the first to 
 conform himself to it, &c. ***** 
 
 " From this it is inferred that the Pope is obliged to hear 
 Mass on a festival day, to fast on a fast day, and generally 
 to do such things as relate to preceptive authority : yet if 
 excommunication or any other punishment should be appoint- 
 ed against transgressors, he would not incur it ,* because 
 these things relate to the coercive authority. 
 
 " Is the supreme legislator obliged under pain of mortal 
 sin, to observe his law in an important case? 
 
 " Ans. If the danger of grievous scandal or of manifest 
 injury to a third person, is to be feared from the transgres- 
 sion, according to all (authors) he sins mortally ; but whe- 
 ther, apart from these things, he sins mortally is not agreed 
 among authors. Some deny it, on the ground that the legis- 
 lator is bound to obey his oivn law, only by a certain na- 
 tural propriety J which apart from scandal or some other 
 weighty circumstance, seems a matter of little moment j^^ S^c. 
 
26 THE CLERGY SUBJECT TO THE LAWS. 
 
 The reader will learn from the last paragraph, that ac- 
 cording to Romish theology, the great cardinal virtue is " to 
 keep up appearances." The Pope or those in authority may 
 do as they list, but they must avoid scandal or else they sin 
 mortally. No doubt his Holiness and his sanctimonious 
 Priests are great admirers of the Spartan rogue, who, rather 
 than betray his theft, suffered a fox which he had stolen and 
 secreted under his robe, to tear out his entrails. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 [No. 30. Vol. II.] 
 
 Concerning the Clergy subject to the Laws. 
 
 *' Are the clergy subject to human laws ? 
 
 " I. It is beyond controversy that the clergy are subject to 
 the ecclesiastical laws, which concern them, both as to com- 
 pulsory and preceptive authority. 
 
 " Therefore here is chiefly meant, whether, and how far 
 they are subject to civil laws 1 
 
 " II. The clergy are under obligation to civil laws, which 
 are not contrary to the clerical order, or to ecclesiastical 
 privilege, so far as preceptive authority is concerned : thus 
 they are obliged to preserve the value of coin ; not to take 
 grain out of the country, if that is forbidden, &c. 
 
 *' But because a layman has no authority over the persons 
 of clergymen, Suarez and several canonists teach that the 
 clergy are only indirectly obliged by those laws ; as was 
 said in the preceding No. concerning the legislator : foras- 
 much as in a similar case, a part should conform itself to 
 the whole community, and because the canons teach, that 
 the clergy should observe laws of this kind. 
 
 " III. But if the civil laws are adverse to the immunity of 
 the clergy, or if they relate to a matter, in which the clergy 
 are exempt from secular power, by such (laws) the clergy 
 are not held either as to their preceptive or compulsory au- 
 thority. The reason is, because in such respects, the cler- 
 
THE CLERGY SUBJECT TO THE LAWS. 27 
 
 gy are by no means subject to the secular power : thus a 
 clergyman is not obliged to stand sentinel, to perform mili- 
 tary duty, &c. 
 
 " What the matter of ecclesiastical immunity is, &c., see 
 briefly in the treatise concerning Religion, No. 196, &c. 
 
 " IV. Persons belonging to religious orders are exempt ; 
 and are declared to be so, because in some respects they are 
 exempt from the jurisdiction of Bishops, and are subject im- 
 mediately to the Apostolic See ; but although they are not 
 subject to the Bishop in those things which relate to regular 
 discipline, yet they ought to obey in those things which re- 
 late to the administration of the sacraments among the laity ; 
 also in those which relate to the preaching of the Word of 
 God, and the performance of public offices, beyond the mo- 
 nastery," &c. 
 
 The chapters under the captions " Concerning the obliga- 
 gation of laws," and " The end and ways of fulfilling the 
 law," contain little or nothing of special interest to the gene- 
 ral reader. If our limits would admit of it, we would in- 
 sert a translation of some of the sections concerning " Dis- 
 pensations," but a brief sketch of a few of the more im- 
 portant principles involved in this Babylonish privilege must 
 suffice. 
 
 " What is a dispensation 1 
 " " Ans. It is a relaxation of a law in a particular case, by 
 the authority of a superior, the matter and the law remain-, 
 ing unchanged in general." 
 
 The right of granting dispensations from the eternal and 
 natural law of God is disclaimed. This, it is affirmed, be- 
 longs to God alone, or to him who has received a special 
 commission to that effect. God will grant no dispensation 
 from his laws, because that would be denying himself. 
 
 " That the church has the power of absolving from vows 
 and oaths is proved from the general concession of Christ, 
 Matt. xvi. 19. * Whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth shall 
 be loosed in heaven.' Besides, the perpetual practice of the 
 church sustains it. Yet this is not properly called a dispen- 
 sation, but the matter is changed, inasmuch as God re- 
 
28 THE CLERGY SUBJECT TO THE LAWS. 
 
 NOUNCES HIS RIGHT THROUGH THE SUPERIORS OP THE 
 CHURCH, AND THUS THE OBLIGATION CEASES OF ITS OWN 
 
 ACCORD." ! ! (See No. 63, towards the close.) 
 
 This, arrogant blasphemy is a striking illustration of the 
 daring presumption of the Man of Sin, " who exalteth him- 
 self above all that is called God or is worshipped." 
 
 " The Pope, as he is the Superior of the Universal Church, 
 grants dispensations in all laws which belong to ecclesiasti- 
 cal right ; even in the laws of his own predecessors, of 
 Bishops, of all Councils, even general ones, and that inde- 
 pendently of the question, whether the Pope is above the 
 Council ; because indeed, according to all, he is the head of 
 the church, the guardian of the canons, and the dispenser 
 of the whole economy of the church." (No. 64.) 
 
 The dispensing jurisdiction of the Pope it is said extends 
 only to matters of ecclesiastical law and order ; cases which 
 belong to faith and morals, are beyond his reach, and be- 
 long to the divine right. But what of that ? Supposing the 
 Pope finds it to his advantage to transcend these limits, what 
 shall hinder him from doing as his predecessors have done 
 before him ? The range of ecclesiastical law is so exten- 
 sive, and the logic of Rome so subtle and ingenious, that 
 there are few cases which cannot be forced within an eccle- 
 siastical economy, which arrogates to itself all spiritual and 
 temporal supremacy. 
 
 The dispensing power of the Bishop is confined to his 
 own diocesfe, and extends to cases either expressly conceded 
 by the Pope or granted by the general Councils of the 
 church. He gives dispensations from the observance of fast- 
 days, festivals, &c., or in a case of necessity which does 
 not permit the delay of a special recurrence to Rome ; hence 
 sometimes when there are impediments in the way of mar- 
 riage, the Bishop employs his dispensing power. Ord.'nary 
 priests have not properly the right of dispensation — but in 
 parishes which are rather remote from the Bishop's residence, 
 they may with his consent afford dispensations from fasting, 
 &c. (No. 65.) 
 
THE CLERGY SUBJECT TO THE LAWS. 29 
 
 There must be a sufficient reason for affording the dis- 
 pensation ; necessity, or utility, or piety must render it ex- 
 pedient, for if the indulgence is conceded without just cause, 
 it involves the dispenser in guilt proportionate to the nature 
 of the case. 
 
 The doctors of the Romish church will differ, however, 
 like other doctors, notwithstanding their matchless unity in 
 matters of faith. Some affirming that arbitrary dispensa- 
 tions entail mortal sin upon the Bishop, others that such 
 offences are merely venial. (No. 67.) It is not for us to 
 decide, when such doctors differ, and we prefer therefore 
 leaving the question to the casuistry of those, whom it spe- 
 cially concerns. 
 
 There is also great discrepancy between the opinions of 
 different authors relative to another very important question, 
 to wit : " whether a dispensation obreptitiously or surrepti- 
 tiously obtained, is valid." A dispensation is said to be sur- 
 reptitious, when obtained by concealing the truth ; and ob- 
 reptitious, when obtained by telling a falsehood. Now the 
 Romish doctors cannot arrive at a unanimous conclusion 
 relative to the validity of such dispensations. There are 
 several hairs to be split before any thing like a sound con- 
 clusion can be attained. Whether, e. g., the surreptition or 
 obreptition concerns the final or only the impulsive cause, 
 will materially affect the case. 
 
 The final or motive cause is " that, which principally 
 moves the superior to grant the dispensation ; so that, in its 
 absence, the dispensation would either by no means have 
 been given, or not without trouble and compensationi or at 
 least not in such a form." 
 
 " That cause is called impulsive, which indeed induces the 
 superior to grant the favour more readily, but in the absence 
 of which, he would have granted (the dispensation) absolutely 
 and in the same form. 
 
 " Let this serve as an illustration of botLpauses : some one 
 gives alms to a poor man, which he affonfcs'the more readily, 
 3 
 
30 FIRST AND SECOND COMMANDiVIENT. 
 
 because he believes him to be honest ; here, the man's 
 poverty is the Jinal, and his probity the impulsive cause." 
 
 Having given my reader the clue afforded by Peter Dens, 
 I must leave him to find his way out of the labyrinth of " dis- 
 tinguos" as he best can. Of course, every honourable 
 mind will instinctively venerate the purity of those holy 
 doctors who cannot determine whether falsehood and deceit 
 can invalidate a case or not. From the premises which 
 some of them assume, the inference is fair that the more 
 proficiency a man has made in deceit and falsehood, the 
 more readily he can be favoured with a dispensation. 
 
 For our part we know not which most to admire, the 
 knavery of the man who gives, or the folly of him who 
 accepts, a Popish indulgence. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 [No. 78. Vol. II.] 
 
 The Decalogue, and the First and Second Commandment. 
 
 " What is the first precept of the Decalogue ? 
 
 *' Ans. The first and greatest is this, ' Thou shalt not have 
 strange gods before me,' &c. 
 
 " What is forbidden by this precept ? 
 
 " Aws. It is forbidden to regard any thing else as God, ex- 
 cept the true God, and in any manner to offer to any other 
 thing, that which pertains to God alone; for the words 
 * strange gods' are equivalent to * other gods,' as is plain 
 from the text in Hebrew and Greek. 
 
 " By this precept, therefore, idolatry, divination, and all 
 superstition of every name, are forbidden. 
 
 " * Before me,' is added : an-d this denotes that God is every- 
 where present ; and at the same time gives great emphasis 
 in order to signify that the sin is aggravated from the fact 
 that it is done openly and directly in the presence of God. 
 
 " What does this part prohibit, ' Thou shalt not make to 
 thyself a graven thing ?' 
 
FIRST AND SECOND COMMANDMENT. 31 
 
 Ans. The same as the preceding words — thou shall have 
 no other gods: for, as St. Augustine teaches, quest. 71 on 
 Exod., it is only a kind of explanation of the preceding part, 
 prohibiting idols and images to be made in the manner of the 
 Gentiles, who consecrated them, and supposed that by this 
 consecration a certain divine power was included in them ; 
 as is plain from Cicero's speech against Verres ; and hence 
 they worshipped them also with the veneration of latria,^''* 
 
 " From which it is plain that nothing can be deduced from 
 this passage against the worship of holy images ; for the 
 Holy Scripture itself does not simply prohibit graven images 
 and pictures : but only in this sense, that no one may adore 
 them, or worship them with the veneration of latria ; but in 
 this way Christians do not adore images, neither do they 
 believe that they possess any innate virtue. 
 
 *' Prove that it was not forbidden to make these images. 
 
 *' It is plainly proved : for, Exod. xxv. 18., we read, that 
 likenesses and images of cherubim were made by Moses at 
 the command of God, near the ark of the Lord ; and, 3 
 Kings (i. e. 1 Kings) vi. 23, the same was done by Solomon 
 in the temple ; also, Num. xxi. 9, by the command of God, 
 Moses erected a brazen serpent, that by looking at it those 
 who had been bitten by the fiery serpent might be healed. 
 
 "Moreover, although every kind of images whatsoever 
 had been forbidden to the Hebrews, that precept to such an 
 extent would have been ceremonial, and therefore would now 
 cease, as St. Thomas remarks, &c. 
 
 " What is commanded by the first precept of the Deca- 
 logue ? 
 
 " I answer with the Roman catechism thus : ' Thou shalt 
 worship me the true God ;' or, Thou shalt hold me the only 
 true God, in faith, hope, and charity, and thou shalt worship 
 me alone with the veneration of latria." 
 
 The division of the commandments of the Decalogue, 
 which obtains in the Romish church, is decidedly objection- 
 
 * Papists make a distinction between the worship which they offer 
 to God, and that which they give to their saints and images ; the for- 
 mer is called "latria," and tlie latter "dulia." The veneration of the 
 Virgin Mary occupies a kind of middle groupd, and is called "hyper- 
 dulia." 
 
32 FIRST AND SECOND COMIMANDMENT. 
 
 able. The second precept, which is as distinctly marked as 
 any other, ought not to be attached as a mere appendage or 
 explanation of the first. In Romish catechisms, the first 
 two precepts of the Decalogue are amalgamated, and in 
 order to make out the full complement of ten the last com- 
 mandment is broken into two. There is something gained 
 by representing the positive and explicit prohibition, *' Thou 
 shalt not make to thyself any graven image, or the likeness, 
 &c." as a mere amplification of the first precept, because it 
 affords a meagre excuse for omitting the second command- 
 ment, in nearly all the Popish catechisms which are pub- 
 lished throughout the world. And yet, were it not for the 
 "strong delusions" of this abominable system, it would 
 be a difficult matter for any honest man to reconcile himself 
 to the " due veneration of holy images," required of him by 
 the Romish authorities with the import of such language as 
 that in Exodus xx. 4, 5, 6. 
 
 The distinction between latria and dulia is a Popish in- 
 vention, for which there is no warrant in the Bible. Men 
 are forbidden in the word of God to " bow down to or before 
 graven images, or likenesses of any thing in heaven above, 
 or on the earth . beneath, or in the waters under the earth," 
 and yet the Romish Church, which claims to be Holy and 
 Catholic, commands all in its communion to bow down to 
 images of saints, and of Christ and the Virgin Mary ! 
 
 The allusions to the cherubim over the mercy seat, and 
 the brazen serpent, furnish no authority whatever for the 
 worship which Papists ofier to their idols. The cherubira 
 were placed in the Holy of Holies, which was accessible to 
 the High Priest alone, and to him only once a year. The 
 common people never saw them, and consequently these 
 images could not have been made for the purpose of receiv- 
 ing Popish dulia. As for the brazen serpent, if we turn to 
 2 Kings xviii. 4, we shall find that after the Israelites had 
 been inveigled into the idolatrous practices of the heathen, 
 
FIRST AND SECOND COMMANDMENT. 33 
 
 they actually did bow down to it and burnt incense to it, and 
 for this reason it was that good king Hezekiah " brake in 
 pieces the brazen serpent which Moses had made." 
 
 The subject of the veneration of images and relics is dis- 
 cussed at length in my Lectures on Romanism, to which I 
 beg leave to refer my reader. 
 
 The exposition of the third commandment (the second in 
 Romish catechisms) contains nothing that is unscriptural. 
 
 " What is' forbidden in this command? 
 
 Arts. " No one," says the Roman catechism, " may des- 
 pise the divine name, no one may take it in vain, nor swear 
 by it, either falsely, or needlessly, or rashly." 
 
 " By the name of God is here meant, not the mere word, 
 signifying God, but the thing signified by it, that is, God 
 himself, or the Divine majesty, or his attributes. 
 
 " Whence, observe that this name, although it be placed in 
 the singular, yet ought to be understood as referring to all 
 those things which are usually attributed to God ; thus the 
 Roman catechism (teaches.) 
 
 " Therefore by this precept perjury is forbidden : also every 
 oath imprudently or rashly uttered, sacrilege, blasphemy, 
 and every vain assumption of the Divine name. 
 
 " What does this second precept teach? 
 
 " The Roman catechism replies : 'that the name of God is 
 to be honoured, and that by it we may swear in a holy man- 
 ner.' The name of God is honoured and praised by acts 
 of faith, hope and charity, and by good works of every 
 kind, especially by the public confession and preaching of 
 the Divine name, by the singing of Divine praises, and by 
 saying as well in adversity as in prosperity : ' Blessed be 
 the name of the Lord ;' by the invocation of the Divine 
 name, and by swearing in a holy manner." 
 
 To all this we respond, Amen. 
 
34 THE THIRD COMMANDMENT. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 [No. 79.— No. 87.] 
 
 Concerning the Third Commandment of the Decalogue 
 (i. e. the Fourth.) 
 
 After alluding to the reasons of the change from the 
 seventh to the first day of the week, the following questions 
 are proposed. 
 
 " What is taught by this third precept, in the new law ? 
 (i.e. under the Gospel.) 
 
 ^^ Ans. Principally these three things; 1. That certain 
 specified days are to be kept holy : 2. That they are to be 
 kept holy by external divine worship, by iieaking mass," ? 
 &c. : " 3. That the same are to be kept holy by abstaining 
 from servile labours." 
 
 " Which days are those that are appointed to be kept 
 holy? 
 
 ^'Ans. In the first place are the Lord's days, chosen in 
 memory of the glorious resurrection of Christ, and for the 
 religious remembrance of the mercy of creation and redemp- 
 tion by Christ. 
 
 " 2. Festival days also are appointed, which have been 
 consecrated to religion on account of some particular mys- 
 tery of our redemption, or which have been devoted to the 
 Holy Virgin, or Apostles, Martyrs or other Saints. 
 
 " What is the object of festival days ? 
 
 " Festival days like the Lord's days have been instituted 
 chiefly to call to mind the mercies of God: moreover, that 
 the goodness and power of God may be praised in the vic- 
 tory and glory of the Saints ; and that the Saints themselves 
 may be duly honoured and invoked by us, that we may be 
 helped by the-ir prayers ; and that we may imitate the exam- 
 ples of those whose merits we call to mind. 
 
 " Besides that the institution and observance of festivals 
 of this kind, and particularly of those which are called the 
 birth-days of the martyrs, are very ancient, is evidently 
 seen from ecclesiastical histories, and from S. Aug. Ambrose, 
 
THE THIRD CO?,IMANDMENT. 35 
 
 Chrysostom, and others, who have written sermons to the 
 people concerning them." (No. 79.) 
 
 Great stress is laid in this connexion upon the duty of 
 hearing Mass on holy days. It is not quite a mortal sin to 
 neglect it, but it is a very grievous offence. Non-attendance 
 at Vespers is a venial sin. " When it can conveniently be 
 done," it is the duty of the faithful to go to hear preaching 
 and- the catechism, but this obligation is not binding if there 
 is merely a trifling reason for absence. 
 
 " But it is to be observed that whilst some will have it that 
 the church enjoins nothing on the Lord's days and festivals 
 except hearing Mass, and that therefore the faithful do not 
 sin against a precept of the church, if they are present nei- 
 ther at preaching, nor at vespers ; yet they admit that those 
 sin venially against the divine command concerning the sanc- 
 tification of the Sabbath, who perform no act of religion on 
 those days, except the hearing of the Mass." 
 
 Moreover, where it can conveniently he done, it is the 
 duty of the faithful to hear Mass and preaching in their own 
 parish. The priest, who without cause continuously neglects 
 to preach for several months, or for one month, sins mor- 
 tally according to Bonacina — and the Council of Trent 
 rather confirms this opinion. 
 
 Acts of faith, hope, charity, contrition, &c., are recom- 
 mended as highly meritorious. (No. 80.) 
 
 The faithful are forbidden to engage on the Lord's days 
 and on festivals in judicial processes, accompanied with noise 
 and confusion, merchandizing and servile labours. Judicial 
 proceedings on the Sabbath or festival days, such as, the 
 summoning of a party, examination of witnesses, formation 
 of a procession, judicial oath, sentence, execution, &c., are 
 null and void. But acts of voluntary jurisdiction, which are 
 done without judicial bustle, are not void — as v. g. dispensa- 
 tion, absolution from censure, election, &c. 
 
 By merchandizing, " fairs are meant, such as take place, 
 once or twice a year, or even every week — also contracts 
 of buying and selling, bartering or hiring, &c., whether 
 made publicly or privately." 
 
 But yet certain things are usually permitted with the con- 
 sent of the superiors ; such as the purchase of certain small 
 articles of daily food, as salt, pepper, sugar, &c., in a store 
 
36 THE THIRD COMMANDMENT. 
 
 that is closed. This, however, as the most illustrious Ho- 
 vius says, for necessity's sake, &c. 
 
 For this reason. Layman and Billuart excuse those, who 
 on the aforesaid days sell clothes, shoes and other things to 
 farmers and servants, who cannot provide themselves with 
 such necessaries on other days. So Marchantius for a simi- 
 lar reason excuses those who settle with their workmen on 
 the Lord's day. The more scrupulous, however, by his 
 own admission, are accustomed to do this on the preceding 
 day. 
 
 Servile works are those corporeal labours in which one 
 man serves another ; such are ploughing, digging, the exer- 
 cise of mechanical arts, &;c. They differ from the exercise 
 of liberal arts inasmuch as the corporeal efforts of the latter 
 are principally directed to the exercise, instruction, or delight 
 of the mind ; thus, to teach, read, study, preach, prepare a 
 sermon, &c., are not servile works, neither are they forbid- 
 den on a festival day. 
 
 To spin and sew being servile labours are forbidden on 
 holy days. 
 
 Whether painting is a servile labour is a vexed question. 
 Medina and Layman think it is not, and that it is therefore 
 a lawful employment for the Lord's day. Common opinion, 
 however, is against their decision. But when mere sketches 
 are made, or when persons exercise themselves in painting 
 for the sake of recreation or improvement, it is thought the 
 practice may be more easily connived at. 
 
 " It is certain, however, that to dye cloths, colour joists, 
 whiten walls, &c., are servile works." 
 
 Notaries and scriveners who consume a great part of a 
 festival in writing on secular business, such as transcribing 
 deeds, accounts, processes, &c., commit sin. 
 
 As to hunting and fishing, unless accompanied with great 
 noise or fatigue, they are lawful recreations on the Lord's 
 day. " Many (theologians) suppose that it is not unlawful 
 to fish with a reed, hook, or small nets for the purpose of 
 recreation ; and they think the same of hunting on a small 
 scale." 
 
 Gathering fruit from gardens or trees is also included 
 among servile labours : but Marchantius excuses from mor- 
 tal sin those who gather wild fruits, such as nuts, herbs from 
 
THE THIRD COMiu'ANDMENT. 37 
 
 the meadows, &c., even for purposes of gain, at least on the 
 score of custom. 
 
 Whether barbers may keep their shops open or not, is not 
 quite clear — but the decision is rather against the practice, 
 although La Croix and Tamburinus apologize for it ; the 
 former excusing barbers if they shave labourers and such 
 as are hindered on other days, or if they shave some from 
 apprehension that they might lose their custom. Tambu- 
 rinus excuses them on the score of custom — but Sanchez 
 replies that this custom has always been disapproved. 
 
 Sports are not forbidden — but are distinctly permitted, nor 
 is it any objection that they are attended with fatigue, as 
 playing at ball, &c., because this fatigue is undergone for 
 the sake of mental recreation, and for rest and recreation 
 from servile labours. 
 
 Neither is it forbidden to travel on a holy day, either on 
 foot, horseback, or in a ship, &c., unless the journey is ne- 
 cessarily attended with servile labour, such as carrying mer- 
 chandize or other burdens, leading beasts heavily laden, &;c. 
 But in lawful journeys, venial sin may be committed, if too 
 much time is spent upon them, and the mind is prevented 
 from being open as it should be to divine things. (No. 81.) 
 
 Bonacina and Collet consider servile labour on a holy day, 
 protracted to one hour, as sufficiently grave to constitute 
 mortal sin. Marchantius requires three hours ; but La 
 Croix fixes on two hours, and is sustained by the more com- 
 mon opinion. It is thought, however, that the quality of 
 the work should be regarded, so that if the work is very 
 servile it will require less, if very light, greater time to make 
 it a mortal offence. (82) 
 
 There are four circumstances which may render servile 
 'abour on such days excusable: they are, 1. necessity, 2. duty 
 to God or our neighbour, 3. custom, 4. dispensation. 
 
 Physicians and apothecaries are excusable for preparing 
 medicines for the sick. 
 
 Servants and poor waiting-girls are excusable for mending 
 their clothes, if they have no time on other days, and have 
 no one who can give them to other persons to mend for 
 them. But their masters sin in not giving them the neces- 
 sary leisure. Cooks are excused in the same way for pre- 
 
38 THE THIRD COMMANDMENT. 
 
 paring articles of food on holy days. Others acquit them 
 on the plea of custom, even when they prepare delicacies. 
 
 Those who make funeral clothes on a holy day are 
 usually excused on the score of necessity, if they absolutely 
 cannot be finished on another day — so also blacksmiths 
 shoeing horses for the convenience of travellers. 
 
 Soldiers are excusable for any acts in the line of their 
 profession performed on holy days. 
 
 It is lawful to labour in a servile way whenever the work, 
 which has been commenced, cannot be discontinued without 
 loss, as in the manufacture of glass, iron, &c. 
 
 So too it is lawful to labour in the harvest or vintage, 
 when there is danger of damage from rain, &c. But when 
 this extraordinary labour is performed, license should be 
 obtained from the bishop, &c. 
 
 Likewise, if persons are so poor that they cannot afford 
 to lose a day, they may labour privately, if they cannot 
 otherwise maintain their wives and families, particularly if 
 several festivals concur, and they have not otherwise been 
 negligent, &lc. ; and when extraordinary occasions of profit 
 occur, they may, according to Pontus and Billnach, be ex- 
 cused for improving them. 
 
 " Finally, observe in all cases that nothing be done con- 
 trary to law; that no labour be deferred to a holy day, 
 which could have been done before, and that more is never 
 done than necessity to avoid loss, &c. requires." (83.) 
 
 Servile labour performed on a festival is not necessarily a 
 mortal sin, as it may be merely internal and accomplished 
 in a very short time, and therefore not forbidden by the 
 fourth commandment. (85.) 
 
 Any sin which is in itself mortal is aggravated by the 
 circumstance of its being committed on a holy day. (86.) 
 
 The first objectionable feature in this Romish divinity 
 which painfully afiects a Bible Christian is the insult which 
 is offered to the God of the Sabbath, by making festival- 
 days, appointed by the Popish church, of equal authority 
 with the Lord's Day. God has set apart one day out of 
 the seven for himself — and the Romish church appoints 
 we know not how many more for herself ^ and claims for 
 
THE THIRD COMMANDMENT. 39 
 
 them the sg,me regard which is due to the Sabbath of 
 the Lord our God. This is arrogance, which is peculiarly 
 and emphatically Roman. From the above synopsis of 
 the sections, which treat of the observance of the Sabbath, 
 
 WE MAY INFER THAT THE INCREASE OF SabBATH- 
 BREAKING IN ANY COUNTRY WILL BE IN EXACT PROPOR- 
 TION TO THE INFLUENCE WHICH PoPERY ACQUIRES. To 
 
 this fruitful source of the abominations of the earth we may 
 trace all the glaring violations of the Lord's day, which are 
 most commonly practised in our large cities, and indeed 
 throughout our whole continent; not a few of which are 
 tolerated even in the Christian church. Those persons who 
 absent themselves from the church on the afternoon and 
 evening of the Lord's day, after attending in the morning, 
 are involuntarily sanctioning the practice of Papists. Indeed, 
 the deluded Romanist, who conscientiously attends mass on 
 the morning of the Sabbath, and then considers himself at 
 liberty to " find his own pleasure" during the rest of the day, 
 is more excusable than the professed Protestant, who with 
 better knowledge deems himself at liberty to spend the after- 
 noon and evening of the Sabbath in amusement, after hav- 
 ing paid his compliments to his Maker by attending the 
 morning service in some house of worship. 
 
 The license which is given to many of the grosser forms 
 of Sabbath-breaking will of course find favour with the 
 multitude, who are lovers of pleasure more than of God ; 
 but it will be well for those who are in the communion of 
 the Romish church, as well as for such as are somewhat 
 favourably disposed to her doctrines and ritual, to reflect 
 that Jehovah will not sufl^er his day to be polluted with im- 
 punity, and that he will assuredly judge the Babylonish 
 woman for all the Sabbath-breaking which is the legitimate 
 offspring of her unscriptural principles ; and if " this mark 
 of the ])east" be found on any one, he must receive of the 
 plagues," which God has in store for her. 
 
40 THE THIRD COMMANDMENT. 
 
 What can be more explicit than the language oS the Fourth 
 Commandment? — " iTemember the Sabbath day, to keep it 
 holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work : 
 But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God : in 
 it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy 
 daughter, thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy 
 cattle, nor the stranger that is within thy gates : For in six 
 days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that 
 in them is, and rested the seventh day : wherefore the Lord 
 blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it." Exod. xx. 8, 9, 
 10, 11. 
 
 How can we reconcile with this precept the license offered 
 in the Romish church, to engage in trifling pastimes and in 
 sports, such as fishing and hunting on the Sabbath day? 
 " Thou shalt do no manner of work !" " Ah !" the Papist 
 will tell you, " this is no manner of worJc ; it is recreation 
 and 'pleasure.'''' But what saith the Scripture ? ** If thou 
 turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy plea- 
 sure on my holy day ; and call the Sabbath a delight, the 
 holy of the Lord, honourable ; and shalt honour him, not 
 doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor 
 speaking thine own words : Then shalt thou delight thyself 
 in the Lord ; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high 
 places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacol) 
 thy father: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it." 
 Isaiah Iviii. 13, 14. 
 
 Here is an express prohibition of such recreation. (See 
 also Jer. xvii. 20, 27, &c.) We are no sticklers for the 
 Pharisaical observance of the first day of the week ; we ad- 
 mit that works of real necessity and mercy cannot desecrate 
 the Lord's day ; for it always has been and ever will be 
 " lawful to do good on the Sabbath day," but it is impious 
 to speak of poor mechanics being compelled through poverty 
 or any other cause to pursue their ordinary calling on the 
 Lord's day. The poor need rest as much, if not more than 
 
THE FOURTH PRECEPT. - 41 
 
 the rich ; if you deprive them of their Sabbath, you subject 
 them to perpetual drudgery ; nothing is better calculated 
 to soothe their distress than the doctrines, consolations and 
 prospects of the Christian religion. Does it not argue an 
 utter absence of spirituality to insinuate that the poor man 
 can possibly be injured by a due observance of the Lord's 
 day ? Even in a temporal view, we believe it will be found 
 that in the end nothing can be gained by Sabbath-breaking. 
 The law of necessity and mercy we recognize as Scrip- 
 tural, but as for " Custom" and " Dispensation," which con- 
 stitute two of the four reasons which justify servile labour 
 on the Sabbath, we cannot acknowledge them. They who 
 plead " custom," will do well to remember who has said — 
 " Broad is the road and wide is the gate that leadeth to de- 
 struction, and many there be which go in thereat ; because 
 strait is the gate, and narrow is the way that leadeth unto 
 life ; and few there be that find it !" And as for " Dispen- 
 sations," we have no faith in them. We believe them to be 
 devices of Satan, and as such we scorn and abhor them. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 [No. 87.-94.] 
 
 Concerning the Fourth (j. e. the Fifth) Precept of the 
 
 Decalogue. 
 
 The 87th Section contains some excellent and unexcep- 
 tionable advice, relative to the honour which is due from 
 children to their parents. We are taught that love, rever- 
 ence, obedience and assistance are justly to be expected by 
 parents from their offspring ; that next to God we are to 
 love father and mother, and manifest our affection " by 
 wishing for them the greatest benefits, praying for their bo- 
 dily and spiritual health, and manifesting this love by visible 
 tokens." 
 4 
 
43 THE FOURTH PRECEPT. 
 
 " They are delinquent in this duty of love, who hate or 
 despise their parents ; who rejoice in their adversity, or de- 
 plore their prosperity, or who wish evil to them ; also those 
 who distress their parents, frown upon them, speak unkindly 
 to them, &c." 
 
 The duty of filial affection is illustrated by the manner in 
 which Joseph honoured his father. Gen. xlvi. 29. — "Joseph 
 made ready his chariot and went up to meet Israel his father, 
 to Goshen, and presented himself unto him ; and he fell on 
 his neck, and wept on his neck a good while." And again, 
 by a reference to 3 Kings, ii. 19., {i.e. to 1 Kings; in the 
 Doway Bible the Books of Samuel are called I. and II. 
 Kings,) — " Bathsheba therefore went unto King Solomon to 
 speak unto him for Adonijah. And the king rose up to meet 
 her, and bowed himself unto her, and sat down on his 
 throne, and caused a seat to be set for the king's mother, 
 and she sat on his right hand." 
 
 " The Roman catechism also teaches that we honour our 
 parents, when we imitate such actions and manners as are 
 commendable, according to that passage, John viii. 39 — ' If 
 ye are Abraham's spns, do Abraham's works.' " 
 
 Towards the close of this section, however, there is one 
 dead fly, which gives the box of ointment a taint of Popery. 
 It is made the duty of pious children to provide a prudent 
 confessor for their parents in the article of death, but there 
 is no Scripture quoted for this, as m the preceding cases. 
 For this omission, we cannot blame Peter Dens, as Moses 
 and all the prophets and apostles, have certainly not re- 
 corded any thing about the matter in question. 
 
 The 88th Section contains some sound rules relative to 
 the obedience due to parents, mutilated, however, by that 
 unfortunate propensity of distinguishing between mortal and 
 venial sin. 
 
 The 89th No. treats of the claims of parents upon filial 
 duty. They are three, viz. — 1. legitimate birth; 2. a de- 
 cent education ; 3. proper instruction in the rules of life and 
 in morals. 
 
 " Under the third head, parents are obliged to see to it 
 
THE FOURTH PRECEPT. 43 
 
 that their children are baptized as early as possible, and they 
 ought to teach them the first rudiments of the faith, to send 
 them to catechism, and when reason has developed itself, 
 use their endeavours that they may convert themselves to 
 God ; further, by precept and example to direct them, and 
 by reward and punishment restrain them from sins : con- 
 cerning which, however, parents are to be admonished that 
 they do this not through anger and too many blows, but 
 rather by withdrawing from them their food, play, and other 
 pleasures," &c. 
 
 " From this infer that parents should be regularly asked 
 at confession, whether they have children, whether they in- 
 struct them properly, whether they send them to catechism 
 and to school, whether they do not permit them to be out at 
 night and to keep dangerous company, &c." 
 
 The claims of parents to due regard from their children 
 are sustained by several quotations from the Apocrypha. 
 The genuine Scriptures would have furnished many that are 
 more to the purpose. However, we will not be captious, for 
 if Papists and Protestants follow the advice addressed from 
 the Apocrypha, they will do well in so far as this precept is 
 concerned. Parents, it seems, are required to have their 
 children baptized as early as possible ,* to this we have no 
 objections, provided the ceremony be performed by a Chris- 
 tian minister, with the application of water only, in the name 
 of the Holy Trinity. But we cannot understand why it is, 
 if children are regenerated by baptism, (as the priests be- 
 lieve and teach), that parents must use their endeavours that 
 these regenerated children may be converted when they at- 
 tain to years of discretion. This to us is even a greater 
 mystery than the practical benefit to soul or body to be de- 
 rived from the addition of oil, salt, or spittle, which are 
 some of the elements of the Popish laver of regeneration. 
 
 " The Roman catechism adds a fourth general reason for 
 honouring parents and all superiors, viz. — that in them, we 
 honour God, because all power and superiority is from God, 
 and God wills that we honour superiors as representing God ,- 
 
44 THE FOURTH PRECEPT. 
 
 hence the apostle, Eph. vi. 5. — ' Servants be obedient to 
 your masters according to the flesh — as to Christ. 6. Not 
 with eye-service, as men pleasers ; but as the servants of 
 Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. 7. With good- 
 will doing service as to the Lord and not to men.' 
 
 " Spiritual directors properly present this motive to obedi- 
 ence, in order that they may induce children and others who 
 are in subjection to obey, by proposing to them, whether if 
 God himself should enjoin anything, they would not cheer- 
 fully fulfil it, but that when a command of a superior is 
 obeyed, God accepts it, as though he had himself enjoined it." 
 
 We must be permitted to demur here. When a parent 
 or any one in authority enjoins something that is clearly a 
 duty, then from the above Scripture, it is evident that we are 
 bound to do the will of God from the heart ; but the 
 case is very different when a priest dignifies his own will, 
 lust or passion by making it equivalent to the will of God, 
 as priests have done in thousands of instances, to their eter- 
 nal infamy ! There are circumstances in which " we must 
 obey God rather than men," as Peter Dens properly remarks 
 in a previous section, (88) but even there, " God and the 
 church" are associated as though of equal authority. The 
 following is the paragraph to which I allude : 
 
 " Should we always and in all things obey our parents? 
 
 " Ans. No. We are not obliged to obey — 1. When a 
 precept of a higher power is in the way ; and 2. When in 
 this matter, the son is not subject to his parents : and thus 
 the son is not obliged to obey, if they enjoin anything against 
 the law of God or the church, or which is in any way sin- 
 ful." 
 
 " Under the name of parents are included — 
 
 " 1, and chiefly, those who have begotten us according to 
 the flesh, &c. 
 
 " 2. Ecclesiastical and spiritual superiors, as the Bishop, 
 Pastor, Confessor, &c. — for they produce and promote spi- 
 ritual life in us; hence Paul, 1 Cor. iv. 15. — 'I have begot- 
 ten you through the Gospel.' 
 
 " 3. Secular superjors are also meant, as the king, magis- 
 
THE FOURTH PRECEPT. 45 
 
 trate, masters, &c. Thus the servants of Naaman called 
 him father. (2 Kings, v. 13.) 
 
 " 4. Those are meant to whose care we have been com- 
 mitted, such are tutors, guardians, masters, &c. Thus Eli- 
 sha called Elijah, father. (2 Kings, ii. 12.) 
 
 "5. Aged persons also come under the name of parents, 
 concerning whom it is said, Lev. xxix. 32., ' Thou shalt rise 
 up before the hoary head, and honour the face of the old 
 man.' 
 
 " 6. All these persons we honour by the abovenamed acts, 
 by love, reverence, obedience and assistance ; but not all 
 equally, but according to the order of superiority, relation- 
 ship and subjection, as S. Thomas remarks, &c. — 'The in- 
 ferior is bound to obey his superior, according to the order 
 of superiority, as a soldier the general of the army, in such 
 things as relate to war ; the servant the master, in those 
 things which relate to the performance of servile works ; 
 the son the father, in those things which pertain to discipline 
 of life, and domestic concerns, and so of other things.' " 
 
 In case of contracting marriage, children are not obliged 
 to obey their father — but they ought to ask the counsel and 
 consent of their parents. 
 
 When two superiors enjoin things which are incompatible, 
 the greater is to be obeyed ; the nature of the injunction is 
 also to be considered, &c. 
 
 What is to be done, when both are of equal authority is not 
 stated, and we leave the question to perplex some future cas- 
 uist. (No. 90.) 
 
 The 91st Section contains a short dissertation on the pro- 
 mise appended to the command " Honour thy father and thy 
 mother — that thy days may he long in the land, which the 
 Lord thy God gineth thee.'''' The promise is correctly in- 
 terpreted as including eternal life as well as a long and hap- 
 py existence upon earth ; the dispensations of God's provi- 
 dence which not unfrequently remove good men in early 
 life, are shown to be perfectly consistent with this promise. 
 God may see that a longer life would not be good for them ; 
 or they may be taken from the evil to come; hence when 
 premature death overtakes good men, grievous calamities 
 may justly be apprehended. The promise that their days 
 
 shall be long upon the earth is conditioned bv the question 
 4 * ' * 
 
46 THE FOURTH PRECEPT. 
 
 whether long life upon earth would be to their advantage, 
 and at all events, they are abundantly compensated by on 
 eternity of happiness in heaven. " He cannot be said to be 
 deceived to whom gold is given, when silver had been pro- 
 mised." The doctrine of this section is Scriptural, and we 
 sincerely wish we could endorse every chapter in Dens' 
 Theology as cheerfully as we can this. 
 
 The Sections 92 and 93, which treat of the remaining 
 precepts of the decalogue, contain nothing of special interest, 
 in so far as the peculiar dogmas of Popery are concerned. 
 They are sound, logical and Scriptural expositions of the 
 duties enjoined by the Great Lawgiver upon all men ; and 
 there is not a moral sentiment in them which may not be 
 cordially approved by every true Protestant. It is not ne- 
 cessary to insert them, as they may be found in substance 
 in almost every Protestant catechism. The only objection 
 which we have to these sections, is the plea for the division 
 of the tenth commandment; this is rendered necessary by 
 the forced union of the first and second precepts of the 
 decalogue. The ninth commandment in the Romish cate- 
 chism is, 
 
 "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife." 
 
 " What is forbidden by this? 
 
 ^^ Ans. Every secret sin against chastity, such as inclina- 
 tion, desire, a lingering delight ;* for that, which in the sixth 
 commandment (the seventh) is forbidden in deed, is here for- 
 bidden in desire. 
 
 " In the same way, the tenth commandment corresponds 
 to the seventh, (the eighth,) and the things which are there 
 forbidden in deed, are here forbidden in desire." 
 
 The tenth commandment then, according to the Romish 
 catechism, is this, *' Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's 
 
 * I have translated the words " deleclatio morosa," a lingering de- 
 light, rather than a morose delight, because the etymological root of 
 the adjective is " mora," which signifies " delay." Tlie nienning- is, 
 " an impure delight upon which the mind is permitted to dwell." The 
 reader will please regard the words "lingering delight" as a technical 
 term. 
 
THE FOURTH PRECEPT. 47 
 
 house nor his man servant, nor his maid servant, nor 
 
 his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbour's." 
 
 The plea by w^hich this presumptuous interference with 
 the order and arrangement of the ten commandments is jus- 
 tified is in fact this : — The ninth precept, " Thou shalt not 
 covet thy neighbour's wife," is the counterpart of the sixth, 
 " Thou shalt not commit adultery ;" and the tenth precept, 
 *' Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, nor his man 
 servant," &c., is the counterpart of the seventh, "Thou shalt 
 not steal ;" the sins being in the one instance forbidden in 
 deed^ and in the other in desire, — hence the propriety of the 
 division. 
 
 Now to this we object — 
 
 Because it is an ingenious invention of the Romish church, 
 as is very evident from the simple fact that on the table of 
 stone, the words " thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife" 
 FOLLOW the command " thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's 
 house,'* (see Exodus, xx. 17.) whereas in the Romish cate- 
 chism the order is inverted. By what authority are the 
 words, which Jehovah wrote with his own finger upon the 
 second table of stone, hewn out of their place, and made to 
 stand in an order different from that which he had assigned 
 them? Do not the connexion and the very unity of the 
 precept require that they should be left just as he placed 
 them? The true reason of this violent defacing of the de- 
 calogue we have already stated. — The second, command- 
 ment is either entirely ornitted or else mutilated in almost 
 every catechism of the Romish church published through- 
 out the world ! Now as we must have ten commandments 
 in the decalogue, the last precept is hewn into two, in order 
 that the complement may be furnished, and that the fraudu- 
 lent omission of the precept relative to " graven images," 
 and the " likenesses of any thing, whether in heaven above 
 or in the earth beneath, or in the waters under the earth," 
 may be covered up, and thus the faithful be enabled without 
 
48 CONCERNING GRACE. 
 
 conscientious scruple to bow down to all the idols, which the 
 Babylonish woman sets up for them to worship. 
 
 This " dead fly" malies our apothecary'' s box of ointment 
 stink again. Whilst we commend the practical duties, which 
 are enforced in these sections, to our own observance and to 
 the regard of our brethren of every persuasion, we must 
 condemn the presumptuous attempt to amend the handiwork 
 of Jehovah. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 Treatise concerning Grace, 
 
 This treatise contains much that would very generally be 
 considered as sound theology, not a little that involves vexed 
 questions, together with some theories that are peculiar to 
 the church of Rome. 
 
 Grace is defined to be " a supernatural divine benefit, 
 given gratuitously to an intellectual creature in order to eter- 
 nal happiness." Grace thus defined is distinguished from 
 natural endowments, such as, intellect, will, free agency, 
 life, or being, feeling, &c. 
 
 It is distinct also from spiritual gifts, such as the gill of 
 tongues, discerning of spirits, healing diseases, prophecy, 
 &c. — all which may be possessed by an individual and he 
 still remain unacceptable to God, as Paul teaches, 1 Cor. xiii. 
 " Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels 
 and have not charity, I am become as a sounding brass or 
 a tinkling cymbal," &c. 
 
 Grace is divided into external and internal. External 
 grace is that which affects a man only outwardly, as the 
 preaching of the Gospel, &c. Internal grace affects a man 
 inwardly. 
 
 Internal grace is divided into grace conferred gratuitously, 
 and grace which places its subject in a gracious or accepta- 
 ble state before God; and this latter species of internal grace 
 is divided into habitual and actual crace. 
 
CONCERNING GRACE. 49 
 
 " Habitual grace is divided into primary, which makes the 
 unrighteous righteous., and secondary, which is an increase 
 of grace and makes the righteous more righteous. 
 
 "Actual grace is divided into, 1. operating and co-operating ; 
 2. into preventing and subsequent ; 3. into exciting and as- 
 sisting ; 4. into sufficient and efficacious ; 5. into grace of 
 the understanding, and grace of the will ; 6. also into grace 
 of the first state, or state of innocence, and into grace of 
 the second state, or state of lapsed nature." 
 
 My readers would probably not wish to follow me through 
 the elaborate treatises on these various subdivisions, and I 
 shall therefore merely note a few of the most striking sec- 
 tions, after giving an outline of the general doctrine. 
 
 " Habitual grace is a supernatural gift imparted by God, 
 which, permanently cleaving to the soul by way of habit, 
 renders it formally acceptable to God ; and by this a man 
 is said to become a partaker of the Divine nature." 
 
 " Actual grace is a certain divine, supernatural, transient 
 assistance, exciting (us) to learn, will or do things conducing 
 to salvation. 
 
 " Actual grace is absolutely necessary to the performance 
 of every work conducing to salvation. This truth is opposed 
 to Pelagius, who denied the necessity of grace, &c. 
 
 " It is proved by 2 Cor. iii. 5. — ' We are not sufficient of 
 ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves : but our suffi- 
 ciency is of God.' And again, Philip, ii. 13. — 'It is God, 
 who worketh in you both to will and to do ,*' and John, xv. 
 5., Christ says — ' Without me ye can do nothing.' 
 
 " It is proved by reason : supernatural order exceeds na- 
 tural power ; therefore for a work of supernatural order, 
 powers exceeding natural strength are required, that is, pro- 
 portionate, supernatural aid, or grace. 
 
 " Besides it is impossible for a human being to do a good 
 natural work without the natural concurrence of God : there- 
 fore, a man cannot do a supernatural work without super- 
 natural help, or actual grace; as no act may exceed the 
 proportion of its active principle. 
 
 " What works are called salutary 1 (i. e. conducing to 
 salvation.) 
 
50 CONCERNING GRACE. 
 
 " Three kinds of works are to be noted here, viz., works 
 deserving of eternal life^ of which, hereafter; works only 
 morally good, of which, in the following No., and salutary 
 works. 
 
 "But those works are called salutary, which in some 
 mode conduce to eternal happiness or justification ; v. g., 
 works of faith, of hope, and of charity, fasting, alms, (fee, 
 if they be ordained to a supernatural end ; and these are 
 things, which ought to proceed from actual grace, in order 
 that they may be called salutary, &c. 
 
 *' Whence observe, a sinner before habitual grace may on 
 the whole possess actual graces, and thus be able v. g. to 
 elicit acts of faith, of hope, of imperfect contrition, &c." 
 (No. 4.) 
 
 We cannot lay too much stress upon the absolute neces- 
 sity of the grace of God to qualify us for the performance 
 of any action that shall be good in his sight. No man in a 
 state of nature can be subject to the law of God, because 
 the carnal mind is enmity against God, and this repugnance 
 can be overcome only by grace, working in us effectually to 
 will and to do the good pleasure of God. Grace effects 
 this not by giving them new faculties but by rectifying those 
 which we already possess. It changes the bias of the will, 
 enlightens the understanding, quickens the conscience, and 
 enlivens the affections, drawing them out afler God and holi- 
 ness. As for works which in any way conduce meritori- 
 ously to our acceptance, we do not believe that grace has 
 anything to do with them. 
 
 " What works are called morally good ? 
 
 " Ans. Those which are done according to the dictate of 
 right reason through the natural powers only, with the gen- 
 eral concurrence of God, without the aid of supernatural 
 grace. 
 
 " These works are intermediate between such as conduce 
 to salvation and sinful works : to say that they are such as 
 conduce to salvation, is Pelasjian ; and to say that they are 
 sinful, is Bajus' error; — of this kind are, to give alms from 
 the natural affection of pity, to love parents and friends, to 
 
CONCERNING GRACE. 51 
 
 restore that which belongs to another, &c., merely on ac- 
 count of the natural honesty and rectitude of reason. 
 
 " Can a man do a good work without grace ? 
 
 "1. It has been said in the preceding No. that without 
 actual grace a man can not do a work conducing to his sal- 
 vation. 
 
 " 2. Man, even in this state of lapsed nature, may with- 
 out grace do some works (which are) only morally good : 
 the reason is, because man though he be injured through 
 sin, is still not deprived of all natural good : besides, as 
 these works are of a natural order, they do not exceed the 
 powers of nature. 
 
 " 3. This conclusion is contrary to Bajus, Jansenius, 
 Quesnel, &c. 
 
 " 4. Jansenius has followed Bajus, Bk. 3. concerning the 
 state of lapsed nature ; also Quesnel, whose 38th proposi- 
 tion, which was condemned, is this : ' Without the grace of 
 him who makes free, the sinner is free only to commit evil.' 
 
 " ObJ. I. John, XV. 5., Christ says : * Without me ye can 
 do nothing ;' therefore, not even a work morally good with- 
 out grace. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : for the sense is, that with- 
 out the grace of Christ, we can not do any work conducing 
 to salvation : for Christ is speaking of those works, through 
 which we abide in him and bring forth fruit ; that is, con- 
 cerning meritorious works, not such as are only morally 
 good. 
 
 " Other passages which are objected are understood gene- 
 rally, so that without Christ as God, that is, without the 
 general concurrence of God, we can do nothing, not even 
 works morally good," &c. (No. 5.) 
 
 The objections which follow are quotations from an oecu- 
 menical council and from Augustine : these we shall not no- 
 tice. 
 
 A mind that is imbued with Scriptural truth will perceive 
 the workings of the Mystery of iniquity in the doctrines stated 
 in the above extracts. We are far removed from the Pela- 
 gian view, that works "only morally good" can conduce to 
 salvation ; and just as far do we pray ever to be kept from 
 the Popish doctrine that any works are of themselves me- 
 
63 CONCERNING GRACE. 
 
 ritorious. But we believe that poor Bajus, who is condemn- 
 ed under fearful anathemas, had " the secret of the Lord" 
 with him, notwithstanding the Pope's bull of excommunica- 
 tion. With him, we hold that the so called " morally good" 
 works of carnal men are and must be sinful ; and for these 
 reasons : — 
 
 Because God looks at the heart, and " as a man thinketh 
 in his heart so is he." God always takes into view the mo- 
 tive in which an action originates, when he judges of its 
 character. Now, as the motives of the carnal mind are ne- 
 cessarily selfish, every action proceeding from them must be 
 corrupt, on the principle that " a corrupt tree cannot bring 
 forth good fruit." " Who can bring a clean thing out of an 
 unclean ? Not one." We admit that actions " morally good" 
 in common estimation may be performed by the natural 
 man, but that such actions are good in the sight of God, or 
 that they are not sinful, we believe to be unscriptural. " The 
 sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord : but 
 the prayer of the upright is his delight." Prov. xv. 8. The 
 unregenerate man walks in his own counsel, and makes self 
 his idol ; now though he may do some actions which are 
 apparently praiseworthy apart from the originating motive, 
 he cannot in his unrenewed state do anything that is pleasing 
 to God, because he seeks his own interest exclusively, and 
 not the glory of God. Whether the Christian eats or drinks, 
 or whatever he does, he does all to the glory of God. He 
 walks by faith and not by siglit. The unregenerate man 
 walks by sight only ; but " without faith it is impossible to 
 please God." Prayer according to Romish doctrine is a 
 meritorious work, and the mere utterance of certain petitions 
 to the Virgin Mary, &c., is made to hide a multitude of sins ; 
 but miserably are those poor creatures deceived, who ima- 
 gine that God hears with complacency the " vain repeti- 
 tions," which are the offspring either of superstition or slav- 
 ish fear. So far from purchasing salvation in any measure 
 or degree, they are an abomination in the sight of God. 
 
CONCERNING GRACE. 53 
 
 Whilst we maintain that no man can perform an action 
 that is really "morally good" without the aid of divine grace, 
 and whilst we contend that every thing which is done by the 
 unregenerate man is tainted with siriy and is therefore sinful, 
 we must not be understood as saying, nor can we suffer the 
 inference to be drawn from our premises, that it is wrong for 
 an unconverted man to clothe the naked, feed the hungry, 
 &c. &c., or perform any other so called "morally good" 
 action. Far from it. But it is wrong for him to do these 
 things from a selfish motive ; and so long as the actuating 
 principle is corrupt, he cannot please God by any thing that 
 he does, however specious. Yet if all men will not be reli- 
 gious, would to God that they would all be moral ! 
 
 I should be very loth to affirm, that the temperance move- 
 ment among Romanists in Ireland and in^this country has 
 done no good. I bless God for every drunkard that has 
 been reclaimed through its agency, and I rejoice that order 
 and sobriety have, to so wide an extent, superseded confusion 
 and intemperance. But as I believe that "a corrupt tree 
 cannot bring forth good fruit," I am confirmed in my suspi- 
 cion that the glory of God has not been the motive in which 
 this moral reformation has originated. Hence, until the true 
 motive be revealed, I cannot call it absolutely good. 
 
 I do not wish to appear uncharitable, much less to be 
 such, but I shall be most agreeably disappointed if a very 
 short time will not suffice to convince many who differ from 
 me now, that the Romish temperance movement is neither 
 more nor less than a political mancsuvre ! A temperance 
 medal will answer quite as good a purpose as a red cross on 
 the shoulder, or any other mark by which the faithful have 
 been designated in years gone by. 
 
 As to the condemned proposition of Quesnel, that " with- 
 out the grace of him who makes free, the sinner is free only 
 to commit sin," there ]s a sense in which I believe it can be 
 successfully ma.ntamed. We all agree that the sinner is 
 5 ' 
 
64 CONCERNING GRACE. 
 
 the slave of sin, — his understanding, his conscience, and, 
 above all, his will, are under the bondage of Satan ; how, 
 then, can he be said strictly to be free ? If he is led cap- 
 tive by the devil at his will, he is to all intents and purposes 
 despoiled of his liberty, and free only to commit sin : this 
 does not affect his accountability, because he has voluntarily 
 chosen the yoke of Satan ; he hugs his chains, and prefers 
 the pleasures of sin and the service of the devil to the glori- 
 ous liberty of the children of God. And until the grace of 
 the Son, who maketh free indeed, changes the bent of his 
 will, it is morally impossible that his spiritual fetters should 
 be broken, and that he should follow holiness, without which 
 no man can see the Lord. We disown the abstract propo- 
 sition that any man is under any other necessity of sinning 
 than that which his own imperious lusts and sinful passions 
 impose upon him ; and this necessity, so far from being an 
 excuse, is the very thing which gives the killing emphasis to 
 his guilt. 
 
 The necessity of grace in order to love God, to know the 
 truth and to fulfil the law, is taught in the sixth and seventh 
 sections. Man may learn natural truths without grace ; he 
 may arrive at the knowledge of the existence of God by his 
 natural powers alone ; thus Paul says the Gentile philoso- 
 phers are inexcusable, " because that when they knew God, 
 they glorified him not as God." 
 
 " Yet man in this state cannot, without the special aid of 
 grace, understand all natural truths collectively taken on 
 account of the weakness of his understanding and various 
 other hindrances. 
 
 " Man cannot understand by true and sufficient assent the 
 supernatural truths of faith, without supernatural grace : the 
 reason is, because these truths exceed the natural power of 
 the human understanding ; therefore there is need of aid ex- 
 ceeding nature in order to understand them by sufficient 
 assent ; and hence the apostle says, 1 Cor. xii. 3 — ' No one 
 can say that Jesus is Lord, except by the Holy Ghost.' " 
 
 The next paragraph justly affirms t:iat any one may learn 
 these supernatural truths, and afford a mere human assent 
 
CONCERNING GRACE. 55 
 
 of opinion, without grace, such as heretics bestow upon cer- 
 tain arguments accommodated to human understanding. 
 
 It is an article of faith that no man can obey any super- 
 natural precept without grace. (No. 7.) Also, that the com- 
 mands of God are possible. 
 
 *' It has before been said, that certain precepts cannot be 
 observed by the powers of nature alone, which yet may be 
 fulfilled through grace ; and thus it must simply be said that 
 no precepts of God are impossible to be observed." (No. 8.) 
 
 Grace is necessary to enable us to recover from sins, and 
 to overcome temptations ; but man in his lapsed state may 
 overcome light temptations without grace, by the mere exer- 
 cise of his will. His inability to overcome temptations of 
 long standing, and then only by effort continued through a 
 long period, &c., is to be ascribed not to any want of free 
 will, but to its instability and weakness, and the difficulty of 
 these things; and hence the inability is not physical, but 
 moral. (No. 9.) 
 
 Grace is necessary to enable us to avoid mortal sins. A 
 sinner may escape single but not all mortal sins in a long 
 time. " The sin which is not quickly blotted out by pen- 
 ance, by its own weight draws down to another." 
 
 " Every one who sins mortally, is bound under pain of 
 mortal sin to confess;" "because, otherwise, he exposes 
 himself to the danger of falling into other mortal sins, &c." 
 
 "But observe with Sylvius, that the danger is not so 
 pressing with respect to a penitent sinner, although he may 
 prepare himself for confession through one or two weeks, 
 because he has in a certain way been already converted to 
 God in so far as his desire is concerned." 
 
 A just man may avoid all and every mortal sin, even dur- 
 ing the longest period, &c. (No. 10.) 
 
 " A man in a state of lapsed nature may avoid single ve- 
 nial sins by the ordinary assistance of grace ; but yet, though 
 he be a righteous man, he cannot avoid all for any conside- 
 rable time, except by special privilege." (No. 11.) 
 
 " The principal efficient cause, as well of actual as ha- 
 bitual grace, is God alone. 
 
 " The secondary or instrumental efficient cause, are the 
 human nature of Christ, and the sacraments of the church.. 
 
56 CONCERNING GRACE. 
 
 " The ministerial cause are angels and men : angels by 
 supplying directions by which we may attain to grace; but 
 men not only by praying and instructing, but also by admi- 
 nistering the sacraments. 
 
 " The final cause is the glory of God and Christ, and our 
 salvation. 
 
 " The meritorious cause is Christ, or the merits of Christ, 
 that is in the state of fallen nature : for in this state no grace 
 is given, except on account of the merits of Christ's passion ; 
 so that we neither have nor perform any thing conducing to 
 our salvation, which does not proceed from the grace given 
 by the merits of Christ. 
 
 " The prayers and merits of holy men may be a merito- 
 rious cause, but subordinate to the merits of Christ, because 
 they are united to his : in this way a just man, by works 
 done through grace, may worthily merit for himself an in- 
 crease of grace, and properly (merit) primary grace for an- 
 other. 
 
 " The grace of angels, and of the first man in a state of 
 innocence, does not proceed from the merits of Christ ; for 
 Christ died only for the fallen human race." (No. 13.) 
 
 To my mind there seems to be a palpable contradiction in 
 the assertion, that the prayers and works of holy men may 
 worthily merit grace. What is grace but undeserved fa- 
 vour? And how can this be merited? Surely there never 
 was a bolder attempt to mar the grace of God, and make it 
 of none effect, than this device of Satan to persuade men that 
 they can by their prayers and works merit that, which from 
 its very nature can be imparted only as a free gift. As for 
 the general doctrine of merit, we shall have occasion to com- 
 pare that with " the law and the testimony" in a subsequent 
 chanter, and we therefore dismiss it for the present. 
 
CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 57 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 Freatise concerning Justification. 
 
 Justification is defined to be " A translation from a 
 state of sin to a state of habitual grace and adoption of the 
 sons of God through Jesus Christ our Saviour. 
 
 ** This definition is derived from the Epist. to the Coloss. 
 i. 13, * Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, 
 and translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son.' Also, 
 Council of Trent, sess. 6, ch. 4, where it says, that justifica- 
 tion is a translation from that state in which man is born the 
 son of the first Adam, into the state of the grace and adop- 
 tion of the sons of God. The Council of Trent treats of the 
 primary justification by which any one constituted in origi- 
 nal sin, is justified." 
 
 The increase of sanctifying grace is wont also to be called 
 justification, according to that passage of Rev. xxii. 11 — 
 " He that is righteous, let him be righteous still." But jus- 
 tification thus taken is called secondary in relation to the 
 former. 
 
 " The word righteous is not here taken for a particular 
 cardinal virtue, but for a combination of virtues : and hence 
 it may be defined as being the right disposition of the whole 
 man towards God, his neighbour, and himself. 
 
 " What are the principal errors of our heretics in this 
 matter? 
 
 " Ans. 1 . They teach that in justification sins are not. 
 truly remitted, but only covered by the justice of Christ, as 
 Jacob was covered with the garment of Esau. 
 
 " 2. That justification is not eflected through habitual 
 grace dwelling in the soul, but through the alone righteous- 
 ness of Christ imputed to us. 
 
 " 3. That in order to righteousness no other disposition 
 than faith alone is required. 
 
 "S. Thomas refiated these errors long before they arose, 
 God so disposing (him)." (No. 26.) 
 
 " Prove that in justification sins are truly remitted and 
 blotted out.. 
 
 " Ans. 1. It is proved, first from Ps. 1. 2, * Blot out mine 
 5* 
 
58 CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 
 
 iniquity;" Egh. i. 14, *That we should be holy and without 
 blame before him.' Also, 1 John i. 7, ' The blood of Jesus 
 Christ cleanseth us from all sin.' 
 
 " 2. It is proved by reason ; because, otherwise, it would 
 follow that a man was righteous and unrighteous at the same 
 time: because it is supposed that he is justified, and that the 
 pollution of sin remains besides. 
 
 " 3. Finally, this was settled by the Council of Trent, 
 sess. 5, can. 5 — ' If any one denies that the guilt of original 
 sin is remitted through the grace of Jesus Christ our Lord, 
 which is conferred in baptism ; or even asserts that that is 
 not altogether removed, which has the true and proper na- 
 ture of sin ; but says that it is only erased or not imputed ; 
 let him be accursed.' " 
 
 "Oft/./. It is said, Ps. eS21, 'Blessed are they whose 
 transgressions are forgiven, and whose sins are covered ;' 
 and V. 2, * Blessed is the man to whom the Lord does not 
 impute sin :' therefore sins in justification are not blotted out, 
 but are only covered, and are not imputed. 
 
 *' Ans. I deny the inference ; for, sins to be covered before 
 God is the same as to be blotted out and destroyed : because 
 *all things are naked and open to his eyes,' Heb. iv. 13; 
 therefore in order that our sins may be covered before God, 
 it is necessary that they in no manner exist. 
 
 " In the second verse, he is called blessed, who has com- 
 mitted nothing which could be imputed to himself as sin : or 
 if the Psalmist treats of him who has sinned, God is then 
 said not to impute sin by remitting it. 
 
 " ObJ. 11. Rom. xiii. 14, it is said, ' Put ye on the Lord 
 Jesus Christ ;' therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : for to put on is here spoken 
 of, because justification is conferred outwardly through the 
 application of the Holy Spirit by way of ornament to ihe 
 soul ; and this is not effected by a mere external imputation, 
 but by an internal change, by casting away the works of 
 darkness, putting off the old man, &c. 
 ' " When is God said to remit mortal sin ? 
 
 " Ans. When he wipes off and blots out the stain of this 
 sin from the mind of the person who has sinned. 
 
 " Through what is the stain of mortal sin blotted out 1 
 
CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 59 
 
 " Ans. Through sanctifying grace, which is imparted by 
 God. 
 
 " Can mortal sin be consistent at the same time in the 
 same subject with sanctifying grace? Also, can mortal sin 
 be remitted without the application of sanctifying grace? 
 
 " Some suppose that this may be done by the absolute 
 power of God : but it is useless to ask this ; because it is cer- 
 tain, according to the present divine order, that sanctifying 
 grace is not consistent with mortal sin, neither can this be 
 remitted without the application of that grace. This is plain 
 from the condemnation of the 31st, 32d, 33d and 71st of the 
 propositions of Bajus. (No. 27.) 
 
 "• Imputed Righteousness is repugnant to Holy Scripture^ 
 
 " Prove against the heretics, that justification is formally 
 effected through the application of habitual grace dwelling in 
 the soul ; but not through the righteousness of Christ out- 
 wardly imputed to us. 
 
 " 1. Ans. It is proved from Rom. v. 5, * The love of God is 
 shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, who is given 
 to us ;' concerning which St. Aug. Bk. concerning the Spirit 
 and the Letter, chap. 23, says : ' The love of God is said to 
 be shed abroad in our hearts, not that (love) by which he 
 himself loves us, but (that) by which he makes us lovers of 
 himself; just as that was called the righteousness of God,.by 
 the gift of which we are rendered righteous.' 
 
 "Hence the Coun. of Trent, sess.6. can. 11. decreed against 
 the heretics, ' If any one shall say that men are justified 
 either by the mere imputation of the righteousness of Christ, 
 or by the sole remission of sins, that grace and love being 
 excluded which is shed abroad in their hearts by the Holy 
 Spirit and remaining in them ; or also (who shall say) that 
 the grace by which we are justified is only the favour of 
 God, let him be accursed.' 
 
 " Ohj. I. It is said 1 Cor. i. 30 — Christ, * who is made 
 to us of God wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, 
 and redemption ;' therefore we are formally declared right- 
 eous through the righteousness of Christ. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : because these and similar 
 (passages) where Christ is called our peace, life, salvation, 
 resurrection, &c., ought to be received in a causal not a 
 
60 CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 
 
 formal sense : for it is only meant, that Christ is the merito- 
 rious cause of our justification, &c. This is plain, because 
 when Christ is said to be our wisdom, it is evident that man 
 is not formally wise with the wisdom of Christ, but with 
 the wisdom pecuJiar to himself. 
 
 " Conclude that to the justification of every sinner these 
 two things are required, 1., the application of divine grace, 
 and 2. the remission of all mortal sins: which is effected in 
 little children through Baptism, without any previous dispo- 
 sition : not so in adults." (No. 28.) 
 
 " What is required for the justification of a sinner? 
 
 " Ans. For infants before the use of reason, and for 
 those who have been idiots perpetually, no disposition is re- 
 quired for justification, as they are justified certainly through 
 the Baptism of water, or of blood. 
 
 " For the justification of an adult through Baptism, the 
 Council of Trent, Sess. 6. chap. 6. requires a disposition 
 through seven degrees or impulses of the soul. 
 
 "The first is the impulse of divine grace, by which the 
 sinner is excited and assisted, according to Jer. xxxi. 19., 
 
 * after thou didst convert me, I did penance.' 
 
 " The second is an act of faith, * because he that cometh 
 to God must believe.' Heb. xi. 6. 
 
 " The third is an impulse of fear, useful certainly, yet 
 not necessary, by which the sinner understanding through 
 faith that he is guilty of eternal damnation, endeavours to 
 put away his sins ; according to that passage Eccle. i. 27. 
 
 * The fear of the Lord driveth out sin.' 
 
 " The fourth : because also through faith, the sinner 
 considers the sovereign mercy of God, and the infinite merits 
 of Christ, hence he is elevated into hope, trusting that God 
 will be propitious to him; according to that passage. Matt. 
 ix, 2., ' Be of good heart : thy sins are forgiven thee.' 
 
 " The fifth : after hope follows the incipient love of 
 God, as the fountain of all righteousness; for when the sin- 
 ner considers the distinguished goodness of God, that he is 
 willing to forgive sins even to the unworthy, he begins to 
 love God before all things (else) ; this act is denoted, Joel ii. 
 12. — ' Be converted to me with all your heart.' 
 
 " The sixth act is hatred and detestation of sin, or 
 an act of contrition ; for he who loves God as the fountain 
 
CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 6i 
 
 of all righteousness, cannot but detest sin : this act is ex- 
 pressed, Acts ii. 38. — ' Do penance.' 
 
 "The seventh is the purpose of receiving the sacra- 
 ment, of beginning a new life, and keeping the divine com- 
 mandments, according to that passage of Ezek. xviii. 31. — 
 
 * Make to yourselves a new heart and a new spirit," &c., &c. 
 (No. 29.) 
 
 " Concerning the justifying and special Faith of Heretics." 
 
 " What does faith do towards justification 1 
 
 " I. I answer with Council of Trent, Sess. 6. can. 8. — 
 
 * Faith is the beginning of man's salvation, the foundation 
 and root of all justification ; without which it is impossible 
 to please God.' 
 
 *' Does faith alone justify ? 
 
 " II. Ans. Thus Simon Magus asserted, against whom St. 
 James says, chap. ii. 24. — ' By works a man is justified, and 
 not by faith only.' 
 
 " The negative answer is proved also by 1 Cor. xiii. 2. — 
 
 * If I should have all faith — but have not charity, I am no- 
 thing ;' and from 1 John, iii. 14. — 'He that loveth not abideth 
 in death.' Hence, the Council of Trent decreed, Sess. 6. can. 
 9. — « If any one shall say, that a wicked man is justified by 
 faith alone — let him be accursed.' 
 
 " The Lutherans and Calvinists revived this heresy under 
 another explanation, distinguishing a threefold faith : — 
 
 " III. 1. Historical faith, by which we believe all those 
 things to be true which are contained in the Holy Scriptures. 
 
 " 2. The faith of miracles, by which miracles were per- 
 formed : through which we implicitly believe, that there is 
 nothing which cannot be done by God. 
 
 " 3. The third they call the faith of promises^ by which 
 the divine promises concerning salvation and the remission 
 of sins are believed. This they subdivide into general, by 
 which is believed that God has promised to a-ll believers, sal- 
 vation and the remission of sins ; and into special, by which 
 every man in particular believes, or rather confidently trusts, 
 that his sins have been remitted for the sake of the merits 
 of Christ. 
 
 " IV. The heretics affirm that this special faith so justifies, 
 that every one who believes, or confidently trusts that he is 
 
62 CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 
 
 absolved from his sins, and that the righteousness of Cljrist 
 is imputed to him, is by that very act (eo ipso) righteous. 
 
 ** V. This empty and fictitious faith the Council of Trent 
 condemned, Sess. 6. chap. 9. and can. 12, 13, and 14. 
 
 " VI. It is refuted also by the Holy Scripture, in which 
 this rash faith is nowhere found ; but that faith by which we 
 believe that those things are true which have been divinely 
 revealed, and to which works are joined — thus, Gal. v. 6, it 
 is said — ' Faith which works by love — avails.' 
 
 *' Obj. I. It is said. Acts xiii. 39. — ' In him every one 
 who believes is justified.' Therefore, &c. — 
 
 " Ans. There the question is not concerning special faith, 
 but concerning faith in Christ ; but justification is ascribed 
 to faith, not as if it were alone sufficient, but because it is 
 necessary, and (is) the foundation of justification. 
 
 " VII. Observe, generally, that the Holy Scriptures at- 
 tribute one and the same thing sometimes to one cause as 
 the only one, sometimes to another ; and this mode of speak- 
 ing is frequent. Thus, it is said, Luke xi. 41. — * Give alms, 
 and behold all things are clean unto you.' Rom. viii. 24. — 
 * We are saved by hope ;' and 1 John, iv. 7. — ' Every one 
 who loves is born of God.' In which places, although no- 
 thing is said about faith, yet it is still certain that that dispo- 
 sition is still necessarily required for the remission of sins: 
 and hence you may rightly understand similar modes of 
 speech under this condition. If other requisites are present ; 
 or in a negative sense : if faith is not present, if alms are 
 not given, if hope is not present, justification cannot be ef- 
 fected. 
 
 " ObJ. 11. The apostle says, Rom. iii. 28. — * We account 
 a man to be justified by faith without the works of the law.* 
 Therefore, &c. — 
 
 " J.W5. I deny the inference : because only legal works of the 
 old law are excluded, and works done by the powers of na- 
 ture alone; not works of charity, penance, &c. Therefore, 
 the opposition is made not of faith against the works of the 
 new law, as heretics pretend, but of the new law against the 
 old law, and the law of nature. — (No. 30.) 
 
 *' Concerning assurance of the state of grace and faith.'''' 
 "Can a man certainly know that he has sanctifying 
 grace 1 
 
CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 63 
 
 *' I. Ans. Without special revelation, no one can know 
 with the assurance of faith that he has sanctifying grace. 
 This was settled in Council of Trent, sess. 6. ch. 9, against 
 our heretics, who pretend that all can and ought with divine 
 faith to believe that they are righteous ; and that otherwise, 
 they are neither righteous nor believers. 
 
 II. Yet by special revelation a man can know certainly 
 that he is in (a state of) grace. Thus, the Divine Virgin 
 knew this when it was said to her by the angel — ' Hail ! full 
 of grace.' The paralytic. Matt. ix. 2.—* Be of good heart. 
 Son, thy sins are forgiven thee ;' and the woman who was a 
 sinner, Luke vii. 47. — ' Many sins are forgiven her because 
 she loved much ;' knew that their sins were remitted to them. 
 Concerning St. Paul, it is disputed whether his justification 
 and predestination were revealed to him. 
 
 " A man cannot even know from special revelation, with 
 absolute moral certainty, which excludes all fear, that he is 
 in sanctifying grace : because we cannot know any thing 
 certainly unless it is evident, or rests upon infallible author- 
 ity — but there is room for neither in this case. 
 
 " The Holy Scripture frequently asserts this very thing : 
 as Eccles. ix. 1. — ' Man knoweth not whether he be worthy 
 of love or hatred.' 1 Cor. iv. 4. — ' I am not conscious to 
 myself of anything ; yet in this I am not justified ;' and 
 Phil. ii. 12. — 'Work your salvation with fear and trem- 
 bling.' 
 
 "Oft/. /. Rom. viii. 16, it is said: *The Spirit himself 
 giVeth testimony with our spirit, that we are the sons of 
 God ;' therefore, we can most certainly know that we are in 
 grace. 
 
 "Ans. /. With St. Chrysostom I deny the inference : be- 
 cause that testimony is not concerning a particular person, 
 but concerning the assembly of the faithful, or concerning 
 the church : that the church is doubtless the assembly of the 
 sons of God, but not that this or that person is the son of 
 God through love. 
 
 " 2. The Holy Spirit gives a certain testimony to every 
 righteous man that he is the son of God, which testimony 
 in itself is most sure, but is not known for sure by the 
 righteous man : because it is perceived only by signs, which 
 make only a probable conjecture. Hence, we are forbidden 
 
64 CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 
 
 to manifest too much confidence: for, Eccles. viii. 14, it is 
 said, — ' There are wicked men, who are as secure as though 
 they had the deeds of the just.' 
 
 '•'■Ohj. II. It is said, 1 John, iii. 14. — * We know that we 
 have passed from death to Ufe,' &c. — 
 
 ^^Ans. I deny the inference ; for this sentence is manifestly 
 general, signifying that they had been translated from death 
 to life who love the brethren ; but John trusted that himself 
 and others were of that number. 
 
 " IV. Yet authors generally maintain, that a man may 
 have some moral or conjectural assurance of his own ac- 
 ceptance ; which, though it may not exclude all fear, yet 
 takes away the discomposure and anxiety of mind, accord- 
 ing to that, 1 John, iii. 21.^' If our heart do not reprehend 
 us, we have confidence toward God.' 
 
 " May a man be certain that he has faith ? 
 
 " V. Ans. Sylvius thinks that a believing man can be al- 
 together sure that he believes or assents to the things reveal- 
 ed by God : because the church sometimes enjoins that the 
 faithful swear that they believe the mysteries of faith. Be- 
 sides, faith is in the understanding ; but the understanding 
 can be sure of its. own assent, as a faculty may perceive and 
 reflect beyond itself. Add to this, that faith has a certain 
 and infallible external rule, viz. : the creed of the church. 
 
 " Yet Herincx and others maintain, that a believer can 
 have no more than a moral certainty ; because, although the 
 understanding may certainly know that it firmly believes : yet 
 it cannot so certainly know whether it believes with super- 
 natural and divine faith ; because supernatural does not fall 
 under notice. The creed of the church renders, indeed, be- 
 lievers certain concerning the object which they believe, 
 namely, that it has been revealed by God ; but it does not 
 render them certain concerning the act itself of believing 
 whether it be truly supernatural ; and hence it may be pro- 
 perly said, that the oath which the church sometimes requires, 
 is not concerning the supernaturality, but only concerning 
 the act of faith in itself. 
 
 " Whether any one may be sure that he has the habit of 
 faith or hope, is not clear as yet. That no one can be sure 
 of his own predestination or election to glory, we have said 
 ia the treatise concerning God." 
 
CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 65 . 
 
 I have given the views of the Romish theologian at length, 
 because the doctrine which is involved in this section has 
 justly been called " doctrina stantis aut cadentis Ecclesice." 
 It is in fact the key-stone in the noble arch of divine revela- 
 tion : take away from any theological system the great truth 
 that 7ce are Justified freely through faith only for the 
 sake of Chrisfs merits^ and the whole fabric tumbles at 
 once into a chaotic heap of rubbish ! Men may prop up 
 the ruins by all the scholastic lore that has been accumulat- 
 ing for ages, and they may seek to cement them by the 
 " unanimous consent of the Fathers," but this daubing with 
 untempered mortar will not keep one stone upon another, 
 when the salvation of a single soul is made to rest upon 
 this foundation. " Other foundation can no man lay than 
 that is laid, which is Christ Jesus." This corner stone is 
 broad enough and deep enough to sustain the hope of 
 every sinner, even though all men should build upon it 
 alone. We want not the subordinate merits of the Saints — 
 for even the holiest of men always have been saved and 
 ever will be saved by grace. And if they confessed that 
 they were sinners, justly condemned and ruined, if they fled 
 for refuge to Christ, and plunged into the fountain opened 
 for sin and uncleanness, acknowledging that their righteous- 
 nesses were filthy rags, and that the blood of Christ alone 
 cleanseth from all sin, how can their merits assist the sin- 
 ner ? If Naaman had told the prophet that he would con- 
 sent to wash in Jordan frst, on condition that he might 
 complete his ablutions in Abama and Pharpar, think you 
 that Elijah would have said, " Go and be clean ?" No. Be- 
 cause the Lord God was putting the faith of the proud Syrian 
 to the test, whether he would prefer the river of Israel to all 
 the streams of Damascus. And now that he has " opened 
 a fountain in the House of David," shall sinners wash in 
 that Jirstj and then go and bathe in the merits of the Saints? 
 What are the merits of God's Saints ? When they came to 
 6 
 
 ' f^' ^ 
 
66 CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 
 
 Christ, before ever they could wash and be clean, did they 
 not all with one mouth confess that death and hell were 
 their only merits 1 From these merits they prayed to be 
 delivered — and if the sinner will wash in them^ what is this, 
 but to cast himself into the waves of eternal death, and 
 bathe his soul in the burning lake 1 
 
 Is not the righteousness of Christ, " the white raiment" 
 in which the saints are clothed ] But how did they get this 
 shining apparel? Was it not by confessing with shame, 
 " All our righteousnesses are as filthy rags," and then look- 
 ing to the finished righteousness of the Lamb of God ? And 
 shall the sinner go to Christ Jirsty and buy of him without 
 money and without price, the white raiment offered in the 
 Gospel, and then clothe himself in the merits of the saints, 
 those " filthy rags," which with tears of shame they have 
 cast off for ever 1 Satan well knows that some minds would 
 be startled were he boldly to suggest that the blood of Christ 
 is utterly inefficacious for the sinner's redemption, and there- 
 fore he craftily seeks to make that blood of none effect, by 
 adding to it, the Tnerits of the saints. 
 
 Among the principal errors of the *' heretics," the first 
 which is mentioned is, that " they teach that in justification, 
 sins are not truly remitted, but only covered by the justice 
 of Christ, as Jacob was covered with the garment of Esau." 
 
 In the Word of God, the phrases " transgressions are for- 
 given," and " sins are covered," are used as parallel and 
 equivalent terms, and they are so used by the Reformed 
 churches generally. We all teach the same thing in mat- 
 ters essential to salvation; and in relation to the sinner's 
 justification before God, with united voice Protestant Chris- 
 tendom proclaims in the words which the Holy Ghost teaches, 
 "Being justified by faith we have peace with God through 
 our Lord Jesus Christ." (Rom. v. 1.) 
 
 We do truly teach "that justification is not effected 
 through habitual grace dwelling in the soul, but through the 
 
CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. C7 
 
 alone righteousness of Christ imputed to us ;" whilst we also 
 declare " By grace are ye saved through faith, and that not 
 of yourselves, it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest any 
 man should boast." (Eph. ii. 8, 9.) The third error, which 
 is imputed to us " heretics," is, " that in order to righteous- 
 ness no other disposition than faith alone is required." We 
 should like to see the Protestant Confession of Faith in which 
 these words occur precisely as they are here presented. 
 Protestants are not wont to represent saving faith as existing 
 alone in the heart of a regenerate man. They would tell 
 all who ask them that the faith which links them to the Sa- 
 viour " works by love," and that " love is the fulfilling of 
 the law." We are no advocates of Antinomianism. We do 
 not believe that the faith, which consists in a mere specula- 
 tive assent to the doctrines of the gospel, will unite its pos- 
 sessor to the Lord Jesus Christ. We have no confidence in 
 the religion which consists in cold, inert opinions, and we 
 seek no fellowship with any who deny that " faith without 
 works is dead !" But we do exclude our own works and the 
 works of all the saints in heaven and on earth, from all share 
 in our justification before God. We trust alone to the merits 
 of that Saviour, " whom God has set forth to be a propitia- 
 tion through faith in his blood;" and to our brethren, who 
 boast of the merit of their saints and of their own good works, 
 we say, " God forbid that we should glory save in the cross 
 of Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto us, and we 
 unto the world !" 
 
 But the Council of Trent has settled the matter. We heed 
 the decisions and the anathemas of the doctors and bishops 
 of that far-famed council just as much as the fluttering of an 
 army of bats ! They could not endure the light, but with all 
 their ravings and their curses they were not able to put out 
 the candle of the Lord ! It burned in spite of them, and' it 
 will go on kindling into the blaze of the noonday sun, until 
 " the righteousness which is through faith in Christ," " shall 
 
68 CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 
 
 go forth as brightness, and the salvation thereof as a lamp 
 that burneth." It will burn and shine until the Gentiles shall 
 hasten to its light, and send back the shout of the redeemed 
 in glory, " unto him that loved us, and washed us from our 
 sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and pries-ts 
 unto God and his Father ; to him be glory and dominion for 
 ever and ever. Amen !" 
 
 But " imputed righteousness is repugnant to Holy Scrip- 
 ture." Where is the proof? " It is proved from Rom. v. 5, 
 * The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy 
 Ghost, who is given to us.' " A precious text, truly ; but 
 how does this prove that imputed righteousness is repugnant 
 to Holy Scripture 1 Read St. Augustine's Comnrient on this 
 text. But St. Augustine's Comment is not Holy Scripture. 
 Give us chapter and verse, if you please, to sustain the truth 
 of the caption to this 28th section, " Imputed righteous- 
 ness IS REPUGNANT TO HoLY ScRIPTURE." ShoW US the 
 
 passage which says, in so many words, or which shuts us 
 up to the inference, that " the righteousness of Christ is not 
 imputed to the believer." That " the love of God is shed 
 abroad in the hearts of the children of God by the Holy 
 Ghost given to them," we believe ; but this surely does not 
 affect the doctrine of " imputed righteousness." 
 
 Yes, but the Council of Trent has decreed (sess. 6, can. 
 21) against the heretics, " If any one shall say that men are 
 justified either by the mere imputation of the righteousness 
 of Christ, &c., let him be accursed." 
 
 But, we ask for Scripture, not i^oY anathemas. And when 
 we come on such an errand to Holy Mother, and beg for 
 bread, she ought not to give us a stone ! If we are " here- 
 tics," yet she claims to be the mother of us all, and though 
 undutiful children, yet we are children still ; and now if Holy 
 Mother will show us the Scripture, which plainly and with- 
 out possibility of misapprehension teaches that the doctrine 
 of imputed righteousness is false, we will do penance on 
 
CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 69 
 
 the spot, and seek reconciliation without delay ! Do give us 
 Scripture, according to promise. 
 
 Well then, " the heretics object that this Scripture ' Christ, 
 who is made to us of God, wisdom, and righteousness, and 
 sanctification, and redemption," teaches that we are formally- 
 declared righteous through the righteousness of Christ. Now 
 we deny that the heretics — 
 
 But where is the passage to prove that " Imputed right- 
 eousness is repugnant to Holy Scripture V We do not ask 
 you to cavil at the proof texts, which we advance to sustain 
 our side of the question, but to produce such as will une- 
 quivocally sustain your position. 
 
 " Conclude that to the justification of every sinner these 
 two things are required : 1st. The application of divine grace, 
 and 2d. The remission of all mortal sins," &c. 
 
 But where is the Scripture ? 
 
 Holy Mother is silent. She gives us no texts to prove that 
 " Imputed righteousness is contrary to Holy Scripture." She 
 gives us neither bread, nor a Jish, nor an egg, but offers us 
 serpents, and scorpions, and stones, in their place. We 
 cannot digest such food. 
 
 But let us endeavour to overcome evil with good ; and 
 since no Scripture has been produced to disprove the doc- 
 trine of imputation, let us see if the word of God will not 
 furnish us with this " armour of righteousness on the right- 
 hand and on the left." And first, we will state what we 
 hold to be the Bible doctrine on this subject. 
 
 We believe that a man becomes righteous before God only 
 by a true faith in Jesus Christ. His conscience may tell him 
 that he has grievously transgressed, and that he is therefore 
 justly condemned ; he may know and feel that he has always 
 come short of the glory of God, and that the corruptions of 
 his heart are daily causing him to sin ; and yet he is righteous 
 before God, because without any merit of his own, but only 
 of undeserved grace, the perfect satisfaction, righteousness, 
 6* 
 
7t) CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 
 
 and holiness of Christ, are grEfnted and imputed to him ; so 
 that the believer stands before God as though he had never 
 known or committed sin ; and as though he had himself fully 
 accomplished all the obedience, vi'hich Christ his great Surety 
 and Substitute has accomplished -for him. His standing is 
 not in himself, but in Christ. He is accepted in the Beloved. 
 There is nothing in the act of faith itself which worthily 
 merits the divine favour ; but the sinner is said to be justified 
 by faith, because it is through faith alone that the satisfac- 
 tion, righteousness, and holiness of Christ, can be received 
 and applied by the believer. 
 
 " But now the righteousness of God without the law is 
 manifested. Even the righteousness of God, which is by 
 faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe, 
 &c." Rom. iii. 21, 22, &c. 
 
 *' Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the 
 law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed 
 in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of 
 Christ, and not by the works of the law, for by the works 
 of the law shall no flesh be justified." Gal. ii. 16. See also 
 Eph. ii. 8, 9 ; Titus iii. 5. 
 
 " If Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to 
 glory, but not before God. For what saith the Scripture ? 
 Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for right- 
 eousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward reckoned 
 not of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but 
 believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is count- 
 ed for righteousness." Rom. iv. 2 — 6. See also 2 Cor. v. 19. 
 " For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin 
 that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." 
 (2 Cor. V. 21.) 
 
 These and similar texts of Scripture we humbly commend 
 to the special attention of those, who thunder their anathe- 
 mas upon all abettors of the doctrine of justification through 
 the imputed righteousness of Christ. 
 
CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 71 
 
 The Protestant will be surprised to learn that the prophet 
 Jeremiah " did penance^''^ but if he will turn to the Doway 
 Bible, Jer. xxxi. 19., he will find it is even so. The prophet 
 there gives it as part of his experience, " When thou didst 
 convert me, I did penance." Learn hence the antiquity 
 of this sacrament. 
 
 So too, Peter on the day of Pentecost answers the con- 
 victed Jews, who asked " what must we do ?" " Do pen- 
 ance !" To be sure — what else could they do ? The pen- 
 ance, which Peter imposed on them, is, however, not record- 
 ed. It is to be regretted that Jeremiah does not mention 
 either, in what his penance consisted. That would have set- 
 tled the matter. 
 
 But we are farther reminded that the Apostle James tells 
 us, " By works a man is justified and not by faith." The 
 apparent discrepancy between the epistles of Paul and James 
 will vanish at once, when the circumstances under which 
 the latter apostle wrote are taken into consideration. Already 
 in his day, the leaven of Antinomianism was at work. Even 
 then there were men wicked enough to teach that we are de- 
 livered by the Gospel from all obedience to the Moral Law. 
 They who embraced this error of course professed that their 
 faith was suflicient for justification, though it produced no 
 change in the moral character and no reformation in their 
 daily practice. Paul insists upon the necessity of good 
 works being the fruit and evidence of faith, just as strongly 
 as James. Paul commends the " faith that works by 
 love," and says expressly, " With the heart man believeth 
 unto righteousness." And a greater than Paul had taught, 
 " By their fruits ye shall know them." Now a faith that 
 does not produce the great moral results required by the 
 Gospel, cannot be the faith of Christians. Hence the apos- 
 tle says — " Thou believest that there is one God ; thou doest 
 well ; the devils also believe and tremble." They are the 
 subjects of speculative belief, but their faith not working by 
 
72 CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 
 
 love, is after all but the faith of devils, though they do trem- 
 ble. He then adds, " But wilt thou know, O vain man ! (or 
 hypocrite) that faith without works is dead." Now surely 
 it will not be contended that the faith of the hypocrite is the 
 faith of the Gospel ; but it is of this faith that James speaks. 
 
 The objection which is made to the distinction between 
 historical faith, the faith of miracles, and the faith of pro- 
 mises, can scarcely be sustained. If the distinction is re- 
 jected, and we assume that there is only one kind of faith, 
 then the devils who believe, have Gospel faith ! 
 
 But it is against " special faith" or " assurance" that the 
 venom of our Theologian is particularly directed. Accord- 
 ing to the doctrine of the Romish church no man can be 
 sure of his acceptance, except by special revelation — and 
 even then he cannot know it " with absolute moral certainty, 
 which excludes all fear." Now, we know that some good 
 men have frequently not been sufficiently discriminating in 
 relation to this doctrine. We do not believe that assurance 
 is necessary to salvation. It is the privilege, however, of 
 every Christian to know that he has passed from death to 
 life. " Hereby we know that we' have passed from death to 
 life, because we love the brethren." To this Scripture ob- 
 jection is made, and the reader may perhaps see more force 
 in Peter Dens' reasoning than I can discern. 
 
 St. John says, " Hereby we know that he abideth in us, 
 by the spirit which he hath given us." 1 John, iii. 34. In- 
 deed, il seems as though one of the principal objects of this 
 apostle's epistles is to furnish the Christian with suggestions 
 and texts by which he may try and know his true character. 
 
 But the strangest assertion of all is, that " it is disputed 
 concerning Paul, whether his justification and predestina- 
 tion were revealed to him." How then could Paul say, " I 
 am now ready to be offered up, and the time of my depar- 
 ture is at hand, &c. Henceforth there is laid up for me a 
 crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, 
 
CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION. 73 
 
 shall give unto me on that day, and not unto me only, but 
 unto all them also that love his appearing." 2 Tim. iv. 6, 8. 
 And again, " I know in whom I have believed, and I am 
 persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed 
 unto him against that day." 2 Tim. i. 12. And not to mul- 
 tiply quotations or extend these remarks, already too lengthy, 
 any farther, how could Paul without strong assurance of his 
 acceptance, exclaim in that transport of holy boldness, "Who 
 is he that condemneth ? It is Christ that died, yea, rather, 
 that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, 
 who also maketh intercession for us. Who shall separate 
 us from the love of Christ ? shall tribulation, or distress, or 
 persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword ? As 
 it is 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 more than conquerors through him that loved 
 us. ^or I am persuaded 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, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, 
 which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." — Rom. viii. 34 — 39. 
 
 Most sincerely do we wish that our brethren would search 
 the Scriptures, and see for themselves whether the Christian 
 is obliged to grope his way by the feeble glimmering of 
 " probable conjecture," or whether his " path" is not as the 
 shining light, which shineth more and more unto the perfect 
 day ? " Fot we have not received the spirit of bondage again 
 to fear, but the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, 
 Father." — Rom. viii. 15. 
 
74 CONCERNING MERIT. 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 [No. 35.] 
 
 Treatise concerning Merit* 
 
 " What is merit, the second effect of grace ? 
 
 " Ans, It is a good work, worthy of reward or recom- 
 pense. 
 
 " This definition explains merit taken in the concrete for 
 a meritorious action; for merit in the abstract denotes the 
 worth of the work itself, by the power of which it is adapted 
 to induce (any one) to reward. 
 
 " How is merit divided 1 
 
 " Ans. Into merit of fitness and merit of worthiness. — A 
 work is called a merit of fitness to which some reward or 
 recompense is ascribed from gratuitous liberality and pro- 
 priety ; a merit of worthiness is a work to which a reward 
 or payment is due from justice. Thus, the actions of a just 
 man working by grace, merit worthily grace and glory : 
 but the supernatural acts of a penitent sinner, merit ulterior 
 graces from propriety. 
 
 " Can a man merit any thing ? 
 
 " Observe, the question is not concerning merit, strictly so 
 called, which is of such a nature, in itself, and from the dig- 
 nity of the person meriting, that a reward is due to him 
 according to the perfect rigour of justice, for this pertains to 
 Christ alone : but reference is had to merit less strictly taken, 
 and simply to such. 
 
 " It is an article of faith, contrary to our heretics, that a 
 person by grace can truly and properly merit. 
 
 *'This is proved from Holy Scripture. Matt. v. 12, it is 
 said, * your reward is very great in heaven ;' moreover, 
 2 Tim. iv. 8. * There is laid up for me a crown of justice, 
 which the Lord, the just judge, will render to me at that 
 day;' also, Heb. vi. 10. * For God is not unjust that he 
 should forget your work.' But reward corresponds to 
 
 * The reader will please take notice that I quote from the Doway 
 Bible, when Peter Dens refers to the Scriptures, and from the Holy 
 Bible in my own remarks. 
 
CONCERNING MERIT. 75 
 
 merit ; and that which is given by God the just judge, also 
 that which is given from justice is given for the sake of 
 merit : therefore, &c. 
 
 " From these passages it is plain that eternal life also may 
 fall under merit, and even on the ground of worthiness : for 
 merit of fitness is not merit of the real kind. 
 
 " These points have been settled, Council of Trent, Sep. 
 6. ch. 16, canon 32. * If any one shall say, that the good 
 works of a justified man do not truly merit an increase of 
 grace, eternal life, and the attainment of eternal life itself, 
 on condition, however, that he shall die in a state of grace, 
 and even an increase of glory, let him be accursed.' 
 
 " Ohj. I, Rom. viii. 18, it is said, ' The sufferings of this 
 present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory 
 to come, &c. :' therefore our works do not worthily merit 
 eternal life. 
 
 " I deny the inference : for the sense of the apostle is, 
 that the suiferings and tribulations of this life are not equal 
 in respect of pain and grief to future glory in respect of 
 pleasure and joy. 
 
 " This answer is confirmed ; because, 2 Cor. iv. 17, the 
 apostle says, ' For our present tribulation, which is momen- 
 tary and light, worketh for us above measure exceedingly, 
 an eternal weight of glory :' whence, although the sufferings, 
 in respect to their pain, are not equal with the celestial glory ; 
 yet, inasmuch as they proceed from a just man through 
 grace, they are worthy of eternal life in respect of merit. 
 
 "O^'. //. Luke xvii. 10, Christ says, * When you shall 
 have done all the things that are commanded you, say : We 
 are unprofitable servants ; we have done that which we ought 
 to do ;' therefore, we merit nothing. 
 
 " Ans. 1. I deny the inference ; because we are called un- 
 profitable servants for the reason that by our works no ad- 
 vantage can accrue to God ; but this is consistent with the 
 fact that they are useful to us, and meritorious before God : 
 whence Christ says, Matt. xxv. 21. — ' Well done, thou good 
 and faithful servant.' 
 
 "JLws. 2. We are commanded to feel humbly concerning 
 ourselves, and to think either that we have done nothing, or 
 that we are worthy of no reward ; as we have done nothing 
 except what we were bound to do. 
 
76h CONCERNING MERIT. 
 
 Obj. III. It is said, Ps. cii. 4. — ' Who crowneth thee with 
 mercy and compassion ;' and Rom. vi. 23. — ' The grace of 
 God (is) everlasting life ;' and viii. 17. — 'If sons, heirs also;' 
 therefore, no one can merit eternal life. 
 
 ^^Ans. I deny the inference. As for these texts and 
 others, observe that eternal life is rightly called reward, grace, 
 mercy, &c. It is called a reward, inasmuch as it is given 
 for the sake of merits ; it is called an inheritance, because it 
 is given to adopted sons ; it is called mercy and grace, be- 
 cause our merits proceed from grace — because God has mer- 
 cifully and freely promised eternal life to good works ; also, 
 because election to glory has been made merely of grace. 
 
 ** Neither do our merits diminish the meritorious virtue of 
 Christ, as the heretics babble: because our merits derive all 
 power of meriting from the merits of Christ, just as the 
 branches (derive) from the vine the power of bearing fruit : 
 and hence, our merits commend the merits of Christ, inas- 
 much as by his own merits he has obtained for us the power 
 of- meriting. 
 
 " Obj. IV. God cannot be a debtor to men, because he is 
 the supreme Lord : and our works are due to him by various 
 claims. 
 
 ^^Ans. I deny the antecedent: because, although God 
 cannot be a debtor to men on account of men, he may still 
 be a debtor to men on his own account, and his own appoint- 
 ment, by which he himself has thought proper thus to or- 
 dain. 
 
 *' In order to furnish (farther) proof (observe), that in case 
 God should determine to deal with man according to his own 
 absolute right, then man could merit nothing worthily before 
 God ; but as God has already resolved to promise a reward 
 to those works ; hence, now arises the obligation of justice." 
 
 Of meriting worthily. (37.) 
 
 " What conditions are requisite to merit worthily before 
 God? 
 
 " Seven are requisite, of which four relate to the action, 
 namely : that it be free, good, performed from actual grace, 
 and for the sake of obedience to God ; two relate to the per- 
 son performing it, viz. : that he be a traveller (upon earth), 
 and in a state of sanctifying grace ; the seventh relates to 
 
CONCERNING MERIT. 77 
 
 God, viz. : that a divine promise intervenes, by which a re- 
 ward is promised to such work. 
 
 " What does the first condition imply ? 
 
 " That the work must be free with the liberty of indiffer- 
 ence ;" (i. e. liberty of doing or not doing a thing ;) " and 
 it is an article of faith since the condemnation of the third 
 proposition of Jansenius." 
 
 *' What does the second condition mean ? 
 
 " That indifferent works, if such were performed by an 
 individual, are not meritorious. 
 
 " What is imported by the third condition 1 
 
 " That works only morally good, viz. : those which are 
 performed by the powers of nature alone, are not merito- 
 rious, although they might be done by a good man : because 
 they do not proceed from grace, of which merit is the effect ; 
 neither are they proportionate to supernatural merit, as they 
 are natural. 
 
 " What is signified by the fourth condition ? 
 
 " That a work ought to be referred to obedience to God : 
 because, otherwise, there would be no reason why a reward 
 should be expected from him, especially according to justice. 
 
 " Observe, that as well good works, which are (performed 
 in obedience) of a precept, as those which are (in pursuance) 
 of counsel, may be meritorious : for, Matt. xix. 17, eternal 
 life is promised to those who keep the commandments : — 
 * If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments ;' and 
 verse 29, the same life is promised to those who keep the 
 Evangelical counsels : * Every one that hath lefl house, or 
 
 brethren, or sisters, for my name's sake, shall receive a 
 
 hundred fold, and shall possess life everlasting.' Indeed, 
 the endurance of diseases and other afflictions can be mer- 
 itorious and satisfactory ; because that endurance may be 
 freely received by the will out of grace and love. 
 
 " Prove the fifth condition, namely, that the person must 
 be a traveller (upon earth.) 
 
 " It seems that this cannot be proved from natural reason ; 
 but the necessity of this condition appears to proceed from 
 the positive divine decree, manifested to us from Holy Scrip- 
 ture, and the common opinion of the church ; thus, it is 
 said, Ecclesiasticus xiv. 17, * Before thy death, work justice ; 
 for in hell there is no finding food ;' John ix. 4, Christ says, 
 7 
 
78 CONCERNING MERIT. 
 
 * The night cometh, when no man can work :' by night, 
 meaning death : after which he asserts no one can merito- 
 riously work. 
 
 " Hence, St. Jerome says, &c. * The time of sowing is 
 the present life ; when this has past, the season of working 
 is gone;' and St. Thomas, &c. 'It must be said that merit 
 and demerit pertain to the state of life.' 
 
 " Infer that the blessed in heaven, souls in purgatory, 
 and the damned in hell, although the latter do not cease to 
 sin, and the former persevere in good works, yet do not any 
 more merit or demerit by them, so that their happipess or 
 damnation might be increased. 
 
 " The Lord Christ, although he was perfect, or blessed 
 from the first instant of his conception, was at the same time 
 also a traveller, (upon earth), and so long only he merited. 
 The saints by their prayers obtain blessings for us from 
 God ; but they do not properly merit them, not even on the 
 ground of propriety. 
 
 " Who is said to be a traveller, or in a state of wayfaring? 
 
 " He who lives in the body in a mortal condition. Hence, 
 it becomes probable that Enoch and Elias do not in fact 
 merit, because they do not live in a mortal state. 
 
 " Prove the sixth condition, that a person ought to be in a 
 state of sanctifying grace. 
 
 " It is proved from John xv. 4, ' As the branch cannot 
 bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine, so neither can 
 you, unless you abide in me ;' also, 1 Cor. xiii, 3. * If I 
 should distribute all my goods to feed the poor, &c., and 
 have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.' 
 
 " The same can be proved from Council of Trent, Sess. 6. 
 chap. 16, and from the condemnation of the 12th, 13th, 
 15th, 17th, and 18th of the propositions of Bajus. 
 
 " Therefore, the good works of sinners, even proceeding 
 from actual grace, before the application of habitual grace, 
 are not meritorious on the ground of worthiness. 
 
 " Does the sinner therefore in vain apply himself to good 
 works ? 
 
 " By no means : for although they are not strictly merito- 
 rious, yet if they are performed through the incipient desire 
 of converting himself to God, excited by grace, they are 
 preparatory to grace, and are productive of it. 
 
CONCERNING MERIT. 79 
 
 " Show that the seventh condition is necessary, viz. that 
 a divine promise should intervene. 
 
 "It is evident; because unless this promise intervened,^ 
 there would be no title from which an obligation of justice 
 could originate ,* as God is the Supreme Lord of all, and thus 
 he might exact all our works by various claims, as due to 
 himself." 
 
 " Holy Scripture shows that this promise has been made, 
 James i. 12, ' He shall receive the crown of life, which God 
 has promised to them that love him ;' and Heb. x. 36, * That 
 doing the will of God, ye may receive the promise.' Hence 
 the Council of Trent says, &c., sess. 6, chap. 16. 
 
 " ObJ. Many illiterate persons are ignorant of that pro- 
 mise, but yet they do not therefore cease to merit ; there- 
 fore, &c. 
 
 " I deny the inference ; because it is not necessary that all 
 the faithful should explicitly know that promise; but it is 
 sufficient for some that they implicitly know it in this, that 
 they believe God to be the dispenser of the reward of eternal 
 glory. 
 
 "Are, therefore, any works meritorious on the ground of 
 worthiness ? 
 
 " I answer with St. Thomas, &c.. Every human action 
 which proceeds from free will, moved not only by actual 
 grace, but also instructed by sanctifying grace, if it may be 
 referred to God, is worthily meritorious ; and thus not only 
 acts of charity but also of temperance, justice, and every 
 virtue, are meritorious of eternal life, and though merit pri- 
 marily pertains to charity, as St. Thomas says, yet it per- 
 tains secondarily also to other virtues, inasmuch as their 
 acts are enjoined or taught by charity. 
 
 " What conditions are requisite to merit on the ground of 
 propriety and by a person in a state of probation? 
 
 " These, that the work be free, good, performed through 
 actual grace, and for the purpose of obedience towards God ; 
 yet a state of grace is not required, nor a divine promise." 
 
 The doctrine of merit as taught in the standards of the 
 Romish church is so directly at variance with the letter and 
 spirit of the Bible that it refutes itself, when simply con- 
 trasted with the plain testimony of Scripture, which is, never- 
 
80 CONCERNING MERIT. 
 
 theless, summoned as a witness in its favour. If we arc 
 "saved by grace," as Paul declares, then we cannot be 
 ^ saved by merit. The texts which have been adduced in the 
 preceding translation of the two leading chapters on merit, 
 as heretical objections, cannot be invalidated by the flimsy, 
 though occasionally plausible arguments which are offered in 
 reply. It is not worth while to examine them all in detail, 
 as the general principles which controvert them, have been 
 mentioned in the preceding chapter, in defence of Justifica- 
 tion by faith ; but we will briefly instance one or two. 
 When the following passage is stated in full, the answer 
 which Peter Dens gives to it, will appear even still more 
 feeble than in its present form. "Doth the master thank 
 his servant because he did the things that were commanded 
 him ? I trow not. So likewise ye, when ye shall have 
 done all those things which are commanded you, say we 
 are unprofitable servants, we have done that which was our 
 duty to do." If we were to exhibit angelic obedience to 
 every command of God, if we had never sinned even in 
 thought, we could claim no reward on this account — we 
 should have done no more than our duty, and should simply 
 have paid a just debt. But who is there that has not offend- 
 ed in many things ? And if the least offence is a transgres- 
 sion of a law which is holy, just, and good—if every sin is 
 committed against a God whose perfections are infinite, and 
 whose wrath is revealed from heaven against all unrighteous- 
 ness, how can we lay claim to merit, when if saved from 
 death and hell, it must be alone through the exercise of 
 sovereign grace and mercy 1 
 
 In Rom. vi. 23, which our theologian professes to quote 
 thus, " the grace of God (is) everlasting life," we read these 
 words : " For the wages of sin is death, but the gift; of God 
 (is) eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord." Here the 
 apostle evidently wishes to contrast "the wages of sin" with 
 "the^r/iofGod." 
 
THEOLOGICAL VIRTUES. 81 
 
 The sinner merits death worthily, but the believer receives 
 eternal life as a " gift." And lest any one should suppose 
 it to be given (to the saint) as a nnark of approbation on 
 account of his good works, Paul adds, " through Jesus Christ 
 our Lord." Not only so, but the believer cannot do a good 
 work without grace ; this the church of Rome adnnits, and 
 yet in the very face of this concession, she denounces the 
 heretics who " babble" against the condign merits of the 
 saints ! 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 TREATISE CONCERNING THEOLOGICAL VIRTUES. ] 
 Concerning the Virtue of Faith. (No. 8.) 
 
 " There are three theological virtues which the apostle 
 mentions, I Cor. xiii. 13, saying — Now there remain faith, 
 hope, charity, these three. 
 
 " These virtues are called theological, commonly divine, 
 (in Dutch, Goddelyke Deugden ; in French, Vertus Theolo- 
 gales), principally because they treat immediately about 
 God, or because they have God for their formal and mate- 
 rial primary object : farther, because these virtues are made 
 known by revelation alone in the sacred Scripture, and thus 
 were first discovered by Christian theologians, who investi- 
 gate matters of revelation." 
 
 " The word faith is variously received. 
 
 " Sometimes it is taken for fidelity in promises, as Rom. 
 iii. 3, ' Shall their unbelief make the faith of God of none 
 effect r 
 
 " 2. It is taken for the promises themselves and for a 
 vow ; as 1 Tim. v. 12, it is said, concerning certain widows, 
 ' They have made void their first faith.* 
 
 " 3. It sometimes denotes conscience ; as Rom. xiv. 23. 
 * All that is not of faith is sin.' In this sense also, any one 
 is called a possessor of good or bad faith. 
 
82 THEOLOGICAL VIRTUES. 
 
 " 4. It is taken for confidence ; as James i. 6, ' But let 
 him ask in faith nothing wavering.' 
 
 " 5. It comes also sometimes for the object of faith ; thus 
 in the Symbol of St. Athanasius, it is said: *This is the 
 Catholic faith.' 
 
 " 6. Omitting other acceptations of faith, it is taken more 
 commonly for the assent of the understanding, or for the 
 disposition inclining to afford assent on account of the au- 
 thority of another. If that authority is human, it is called 
 human faith ; if it is divine, it is said (to be) divine or theo- 
 logical ; which, if it respects the truths proposed by the 
 church, is named the Catholic faith. In this signification, 
 we treat of faith in this place." 
 
 " What is faith ? (No. 9.) 
 
 " Ans. It is rightly defined by Canisius : A gift of God, 
 and a light, illumined by which a person firmly assents to all 
 things which God has revealed, and proposed to us through 
 the church to be believed, whether these things are written 
 or are not (written). 
 
 " It is called, 1 ; ' A gifi; of God ;' because it is given gra- 
 tuitously by God alone, and surpasses all the powers of na- 
 ture: for divine faith, both unformed and formed, (i. e. dead 
 ' and living,) both actual and habitual, is essentially superna- 
 tural. 
 
 " It is called, 2 ; ' A light ;' that is to say, a spiritual one, by 
 which the intellect is elevated and enlightened to know and 
 believe those things, which are (matters) of faith, &c. 
 
 " It is said, 3; * Firmly assents;' because the assent of 
 faith ought to be firm and certain, without any doubt, hesi- 
 tation, or fear about its opposite ; as it rests upon the truth 
 of God himself 
 
 " It is said, 4 ; * To all things which God has revealed ;' 
 by which is denoted that it is the adequate material object 
 of faith, that these things are all and alone revealed by God: 
 whence is also signified that the formal object of faith is the 
 highest truth of God who reveals it. 
 
 "It is said, 5 ; *And proposed to us through the church 
 to be believed ;' by which is signified the cause proposing 
 objects of faith ; for without the creed of the church it is not 
 plain to us that any article has been revealed by God ; and 
 hence the motive of credibility is signified : for the creed of 
 the church makes things evidently credible. 
 
THEOLOGICAL VIRTUES. 83 
 
 " It is said, ; ' Whether they arc written or are not ;' by 
 which is farther denoted that truths to be beheved are partly 
 contained in the written word of God, or the Holy Scripture, 
 partly in the word of God (that has been) handed down, or 
 in divine tradition. 
 
 *' There is another description of faith, which the apostle 
 gives, Ileb. xi. 1, in which faith is called ' The substance of 
 things hoped for, the conviction of things that appear not.' 
 
 " This description St. Thomas proves to be proper, and 
 reduces it into this form : ' Faith is a habit of the mind, by 
 which eternal life begins in us, making the understanding 
 assent to things which do not appear.' 
 
 " It is called, 1 ; ' The substance of things hoped for ;' that 
 is, the basis or foundation upon which our hope, or the whole 
 salvation (for) which we hope, rests : according to others, it 
 is the substance or subsistence; because it makes eternal 
 blessings (for) which we hope, in some measure subsist in 
 us, by rendering us as certain concerning them as if they 
 were already possessed by us. 
 
 " It is called, 2 ; ' The evidence of things, which appear 
 not ;' that is, the conviction ; because the understanding 
 through faith is convinced of the truth of things, which are 
 perceived neither by sense nor by reason. 
 
 " ObJ. Hell is a thing, which is believed by faith : but 
 yet it is not a thing to be hoped for ; therefore this definition 
 is not proper. 
 
 "Atis. The belief of hell is contained under the last 
 words of the definition, inasmuch as faith is called the con- 
 viction of things, which appear not. 
 
 " And hence observe, not every object of faith is an object 
 of hope ; or that a person believes some things, which he 
 does not hope for ; such are, evils, or past or present bless- 
 ings." (No. 91.) 
 
 The definition of faith which our author extols so highly, 
 and which with characteristic modesty is placed in advance 
 of the inspired apostle's description, militates against the 
 Scriptural view, and as the theory is unsound, its practical 
 operation must be pernicious. So soon as we make " tradition" 
 of equal authority with the Word of God, we pave the way 
 
84 THEOLOGICAL VIRTUES. 
 
 for the introduction of articles of faith, many of which have 
 no firmer foundation, and no higher origin than the depraved 
 imaginations of designing or deluded men. The church of 
 Rome includes among her " unwritten verities," some of the 
 most monstrous fictions that have ever been fabricated ; she 
 has actually recorded among her traditions a vast amount 
 of matter, which cannot be named without exciting derision 
 and contempt, among the more enlightened of her own com- 
 munion. To make the idle stories, which are registered in 
 the Breviary concerning the immediate disciples of the Sa- 
 viour, and other saints, of equal authority with the Word of 
 God, to a Protestant at least, appears no better than sheer 
 blasphemy ! We put it to the conscience of any intelligent 
 and candid Romanist, whether it does not at least wear the 
 appearance of wanton irreverence, to affirm that the prepos- 
 terous fables, (we can call them nothing better), concerjiing 
 the Virgin Mary, Mary Magdalen, &c., are to be regarded 
 as equally authentic with the narratives of the Holy Scrip- 
 ture? Is it likely that Magdalen lived so many years in a 
 cave, secluded from the world, and that once a day she was 
 carried by angels to heaven, to listen to the songs of the glorifi- 
 ed spirits before the throne, &c. 1 Yet this Tradition teaches. 
 
 The worship of images is called an apostolic tradition. 
 But is it not strange that all the apostles are silent in rela- 
 tion to the proper veneration, which is alleged to be due to 
 them? And that, when cautioning the Christian converts 
 against the idolatry of the Gentiles, they never stop to make 
 a single distinction relative to image worship ? 
 
 The kissing of the altar, and the blessing of incense, are 
 enjoined by Tradition. Tradition is the parent of the ortho- 
 dox turnings and facings and gesticulations of the priests, 
 the swinging of the chahce, the adoration of the host, and 
 other strange ceremonies, which may be witnessed at every 
 celebration of the Mass. 
 
 In the Missal, salt is conjured or exorcised, and is said to 
 
DIVISION OF FAITH. 85 
 
 be done for the salvation of such as believe. And water is 
 blessed in order to expel the power of the great enemy : for 
 the same purpose candles are also blessed, and for all these 
 practices, the priests allege Tradition. Hence too the power 
 to baptize bells ; which by this consecration acquire the won- 
 derful virtue of driving away devils. 
 
 Now we appeal to the common sense of every rational 
 man, whether it is not the height of irreverence to ascribe to 
 such traditions as these, the authority which belongs to 
 Scripture ? Since the apostles are gone, we know no surer 
 guide than their written words ; " to which we do well to 
 take heed as to a light that shineth in a dark place ; for if 
 we fulfil the royal law according to the Scriptures, we shall 
 do well." 
 
 Surely the canon of Revelation would not have closed 
 with so solemn a caution against adding aught to its words, 
 if important doctrines had been overlooked, or purposely 
 not inserted. Whilst we cleave to the Scripture as our rule 
 of faith, we have a guide that we may trust; but when 
 men begin to follow the " ignis fatuus" of tradition, they 
 will soon be lost in a quagmire of superstition and folly, and 
 there they will sink, unless God in mercy pluck them from 
 the miry clay, and set their feet upon the rock of Eternal 
 Truth. 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 Concerning the Division of Faith, 
 
 " How is the theological virtue, faith, divided? 
 
 " I. Ans. 1. It is divided into habitual and actual faith. 
 
 " *. Into explicit and implicit faith. 
 
 " 3. Into internal and external faith. 
 
 " 4. Into formed or living, and unformed or dead faith. 
 
86 DIVISION OF FAITH. 
 
 " What is habitual, and what actual faith 1 
 
 "II. Ans. Habitual faith is the habit of faith itself; actual 
 is the act itself, or the present assent of faith. 
 
 " Which faith is called explicit, and which implicit 1 
 
 " III. Ans. Explicit faith is that by which we assent to 
 some article of faith in itself, and known by its own terms. 
 
 " IV. Ans. Implicit is that by which certain truths are 
 believed, contained, not in themselves and in their own 
 terms, but in some other as universal or principal, or as 
 cause, medium, figure, &c. Thus, he who explicitly be- 
 lieves that there were two distinct natures in Christ, also 
 implicitly believes that there were in him two wills and ope- 
 rations, proceeding from both natures. Just so, he who 
 explicitly believes whatever God has revealed, or whatever 
 the church proposes to be believed, implicitly believes that 
 there are seven sacraments of the new law, even though he 
 should not know them. 
 
 " What is internal, and what is external faith 1 
 
 " V. Ans. The former is the assent of faith conceived in 
 the mind ; the latter is the external profession of internal 
 faith by words, actions, or other signs. 
 
 " VI. Ans. What formed and what unformed faith is, 
 appears from No. 2, towards the close, and in what respects 
 they differ from one another from No. 7, towards the 
 close. 
 
 The following are the passages alluded to. 
 
 " No. 2. What is a perfect or formed virtue ; what is an 
 imperfect or unformed (virtue?) 
 
 " Ans. A formed (virtue) is that which is combined with 
 habitual charity ; because charity is the form, the end, and 
 perfection of the other virtues. 
 
 " A virtue is said to be unformed which is in (its) subject, 
 destitute of habitual charity, or existing in mortal sin." 
 
 "No. 7. The other virtues without charity are unformed 
 and imperfect, because destitute of accidental and extrinsic 
 perfection * * * dead faith is essentially as perfect as 
 living faith ; but charity effects that the act of living faith 
 worthily merits eternal life ; but such is not the act of un- 
 formed (dead) faith." 
 
 I have given this section concerning the division of faith 
 
DIVISION OF FAITH. 87 
 
 at length, for the sake of convenient reference ; as the vari- 
 ous terms and distinctions of faith will occur frequently in 
 the following chapters. 
 
 The material object of faith. (12). 
 
 The object of faith is declared to be two-fold — material 
 and formal. 
 
 "^ What is the material object of faith, or what ought we 
 to believe ? 
 
 "They are all those things which God has revealed 
 to us." 
 
 The material object of faith is distinguished again, as 
 ^^ primary or principal^ which is God, and all those things 
 which have been revealed to us in God ; and secondary^ and 
 this, all other things revealed to us by God constitute, such 
 are, the humanity of Christ, the sacraments, &c." * * * 
 
 Matters of private revelation, such as v. g. were made 
 known to St. Birgitta, may be a material object of faith to 
 those to whom they have been revealed, if there is sufficient 
 evidence that the revelation was divine ; but such things do 
 not properly belong to the Catholic faith. Whatever the 
 Church authoritatively enjoins is a material object of faith. 
 
 The formal object of faith. (13). 
 
 " What is the formal object of faith ? 
 
 " Ans. It is the first or highest truth of God who reveals 
 it, which is founded in this, that God on account of his infi- 
 nite wisdom cannot be deceived, and on account of his infi- 
 nite goodness and perfection cannot deceive." * * * 
 
 The assent of faith. (14). 
 
 " Does the assent of our faith immediately depend upon 
 any reasoning, discussion, or deduction made according to 
 the legitimate form of argumentation? 
 
 " Ans. No ; because the assent, which depends upon dis- 
 cussion, has for a partial motive, the goodness of the infer- 
 ence ; as it is an act by which the understanding assents to 
 the conclusion, because it follows clearly from the premises: 
 but the assent of faith by no means rests upon the goodness 
 of the conclusion, but the adequate motive for divine faith is 
 the first truth of God, who reveals it." 
 
ar DIVISION OF FAITH. 
 
 External Motives of Credibility. (18.) 
 
 " What are the motives of credibility ? 
 
 " Some motives of credibility are external, others internal. 
 Very many external motives of credibility are mentioned by 
 S. Thomas, Bellarmine, Wiggers and others, from which we 
 will here submit the principal. 
 
 " The authority of the church affords the first and suf- 
 ficient argument of credibility ; or the creed of the church 
 effulgent by its own marks, (of which hereafter.) 
 
 *' The second is derived from the miracles and signs by 
 which the truths of our faith have been confirmed by Christ, 
 the apostles and preachers down to these times. For although 
 miracles are the peculiar work of God, and as it were seals 
 of divinity, yet they can be performed in confirmation of the 
 truth : and hence are found never to have been done in con- 
 firmation of any other sect; and if at times such things have 
 been divulged, they have vanished as merely marvellous, or 
 as false and the result of legerdemain. 
 
 " Among miracles may be enumerated, the power over 
 devils, by which Christians drive them out of bodies, make 
 them silent, &c. 
 
 The wonderful propagation of the faith by a few illiterate 
 fishermen is also mentioned, (and justly,) as properly belong- 
 ing to the evidence from miracles. 
 
 The third motive of credibility is prophecy : evidence is 
 adduced from the predictions relative to the birth, life, death, 
 resurrection, &c., of Christ, the calling of the Gentiles, rejec- 
 tion of the Jews, &c. 
 
 " And lest any one should falsely say, that these prophe- 
 cies were fabricated after the events had taken place, it has 
 been effected by the singular providence of God, that the 
 Jews themselves, the most violent enemies of our religion, 
 have carefully preserved those books and prophecies down 
 to these times, &c. 
 
 " The fourth argument is drawn from the antiquity, uni- 
 versality, firmness and continuation of our faith ; these things 
 St. Aug. has briefly and nervously expressed, &c., saying 
 — * There are many things, which most justly keep me in 
 the bosom of the church ; the consent of nations and multi- 
 tudes, the authority, commenced by miracles, nourished by 
 
DIVISION OF FAITH. 89 
 
 hope, increased by charity, and strengthened by antiquity : 
 the succession of priests from the very Seat of the apostle 
 Peter, (keeps me) to whom the Lord entrusted the feeding of 
 his siieep, down to the present Episcopacy : finally the very 
 name of catholic, (keeps me) which this church has thus ob- 
 tained not without reason among so many heresies, as all 
 heretics wish themselves to be called Catholics, &c. &c. — 
 
 "To these add the sanctity and purity of the doctrine and 
 members of the church : for those things wonderfully conci- 
 liate confidence for our religion, which the church teaches 
 concerning virtues and vices, concerning the reward of good 
 works, and the punishment of sinners, concerning the wor- 
 ship of God and holiness of manners. 
 
 "Finally, the constancy of innumerable martyrs of every 
 age, sex, and condition, who have sealed the Catholic faith 
 with their blood, affords an invincible argument of the truth 
 ofthe faith—" 
 
 Internal motives of credibility, (19.) 
 
 The internal motive of credibility is two-fold, viz : the 
 supernatural light of faith, and the natural light of the un- 
 derstanding. 
 
 " By the natural light of the understanding, a person is 
 led only incipiently towards faith, inasmuch as by it, the 
 things of faith may appear evidently credible on account of 
 extrinsic arguments, whilst they are attentively and dispas- 
 sionately considered, &c." 
 
 " What is the light of faith ? 
 
 " It is a certain supernatural internal light, or an inward 
 impression of God, by which the understanding is inclined, 
 so that it attends to the arguments of credibility, and is en- 
 lightened so that it more readily apprehends the weight and 
 evidence of the arguments." * * * 
 
 That the delusions of the church of Rome are not superficial 
 excrescences, but vital and fundamental errors, becomes more 
 evident as her principles are investigated. Whatsoever the 
 church teaches, is a material object of faith, and must be 
 received without a murmur even of respectful inquiry. The 
 church says so — and let it suffice that " Rome has spoken !" 
 Now, that there arc in revelation things, which from their 
 8 - 
 
90 DIVISION OF FAITH. 
 
 very nature must be received explicitly, we admit ; and in 
 so far as they do not fall within the province of reason, and 
 are beyond its ken, they are not properly matters of discus- 
 sion, and must be believed though they cannot be under- 
 stood ; such for instance are the doctrines of the Trinity, 
 and of the nature and purposes of God, &c. But we are 
 neither required to believe what is clearly contrary to reason, 
 nor yet to shrink from investigations which evidently fall 
 within the legitimate limits of human understanding. The 
 Bible never requires us to receive the "ipse dixit" of a fel- 
 low-creature as authoritative ; on the contrary, the word of 
 God encourages, commends, and enjoins, the closest scrutiny 
 in those matters of faith which are fairly cognizable. The 
 Saviour blames the Jews for not "judging of themselves 
 what was right." If he had taught that the mere word of a 
 priest was to be regarded as sufficient authority, he would 
 not have asked the Jews, in the language of reproach — 
 " Yea, and why even of yourselves, judge ye not what is 
 right?" It was Christ who bade the Jews "search the 
 Scriptures ;" he was willing that his claims to Messiahship, 
 should be submitted to that test ; and is it not strange, that 
 the sect which claims to be the only and the universal 
 Christian church, should shrink from this ordeal, appointed 
 by the great head of the church, the Lord Jesus Christ him- 
 self! The Romish Church requires that all her doctrines 
 and decrees, whether contained in the Bible or not, whether 
 contrary to the letter and spirit of scripture or not, whether 
 properly cognizable by reason or not, should be received 
 with explicit faith, and that the mere fact that the church 
 teaches so and so, shall be regarded and received as suffi- 
 cient evidence of the truth of any doctrine. Now, in this 
 respect, the Romish church claims more than even Christ de- 
 manded for himself; Jehovah says," Come now, and let us rea- 
 son together;" but antichrist will have no reasoning ; and when 
 the most preposterous absurdities are avowed, then it is that 
 
ARTICLES OF FAITH. -01 
 
 the thunder of Holy Church's anathemas is loudest. Under 
 the section which treats of the " external motives of credi- 
 bility," it will be observed that " the authority of the church" 
 is mentioned as " the first and sv^fficient argument of credi- 
 bility ! I" Then follow the arguments from miracles and 
 prophecy ; these belong to the church of Christ, however. 
 But mark : " the truths of our faith have been confirmed by 
 miracles, by Christ, the apostles, and 'preachers down to 
 these times." That Christ and his apostles ever performed 
 a miracle to confirm the peculiar tenets of the church of 
 Rome is, to say the least, a gross delusion ; but that the 
 priests have sought to confirm the fictions of their faith by 
 monkish miracles and tricks is gravely asserted, and suffi- 
 ciently proved by many good men ; and we are therefore 
 disposed to allow them all the evidejice from " miracles," 
 which is properly their own. As to the arguments from the 
 antiquity, universality, firmness, &lc.,o[ their faith, we shall 
 attend to them in due time. We will merely observe in 
 relation to the quotation from Augustine, that although some 
 of the peculiarities of the Man of Sin were beginning to 
 develope themselves in his day, St. Augustine would never 
 have been a papist in the nineteenth century. 
 
 " The SANCTITY and purity of the doctrine and mem- 
 bers of the church," will furnish us with materials for a sepa- 
 rate chapter, when we come to treat of " the Church" more 
 particularly. 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 Articles of Faith. (22.) 
 
 An article of faith is defined as being " a proposition per- 
 taining to eternal salvation, or a certain primary truth among 
 those things, which are to be believed, having a particular 
 
92 ARTICLES OF FAITH. 
 
 difiicully in being believed. Thus the Apostle's creed em- 
 braces twelve articles," &c. 
 
 u * * * That Abraham had two sons, one by a bond- 
 woman, the other by a free woman ; that by touching the 
 bones of Elisha, the dead man revived, &c. are not articles 
 of faith ; but these truths are reduced to one general article 
 by which all things which are asserted in the Holy Scrip- 
 tures are believed to be true. 
 
 " Secondly, it is required that this truth have a special 
 difficulty in being believed; and hence that Christ suffered, 
 died, and was buried, is one article of faith containing three 
 propositions, of which the two latter have not a different 
 difficulty from the former ; for if Christ could suffer, he 
 could also die and be buried ; but that he rose again on the 
 third day. is a distinct article, because it has a special 
 difficulty. 
 
 " Therefore make a. distinction between these three things; 
 a doctrine, a point and an article of faith. 
 
 *'A doctrine of faith is every revealed truth, or every 
 thing that faith teaches. 
 
 " And this in like manner is said of a point and an article 
 of faith. 
 
 " A point, which others call a proposition of faith is in- 
 deed a revealed truth, but a less important one, and not to 
 be explicitly believed by all : for instance that Saul was the 
 first King of Israel. 
 
 " An article of faith is a more important truth, and per- 
 taining to eternal salvation ; v. g. The consubstantiality of 
 the Word with the Father." 
 
 Have articles of faith increased in iJie lapse of time 7 (23.) 
 
 " From Adam to the times of the Apostles, it is certain 
 that they have increased — for there are many things, which 
 are believed explicitly and in a greater number under the 
 new law, v. g. The incarnation, passion, resurrection, sacra- 
 ments, &c. of Christ, which were not thus believed under 
 the old law." 
 
 " Whether they have increased as to their substance or 
 only as to their explanation is a question. The latter is the 
 more generally received opinion. 
 
 Since the times of the Apostles, articles of faith have 
 
ARTICLES OF FAITH. 93 
 
 not increased. " When the spirit of truth shall have come, 
 he will teach you all truth;" "therefore new revelations, 
 which concern the Catholic faith ought no more to be ad- 
 mitted." 
 
 " You will say : after the apostles' times many truths 
 were defined and propounded by Councils and Popes as be- 
 longing to the faith, which before the definition were not 
 matters of faith ; therefore also, since the times of the apos- 
 tles, articles of faith have increased. 
 
 " J./15. I deny the inference: because those truths had 
 been explicitly known and propounded to the church by the 
 apostles ; therefore the church in defining did not establish 
 an article altogether new, but again propounded it particular- 
 ly ; yet not by a new revelation, but only declaring what 
 things ought to be believed, and had been handed down and 
 believed by the apostles." 
 
 " The church is not less learned or intelligent in the mys- 
 teries of faith since the apostles' times — ' because as in 
 earlier so also in later times, the church is the ground and 
 the pillar of truth,' to which God has promised his assistance 
 even to the end of time. 
 
 " And hence this remark of the heretics is to be rejected, 
 &c. that the church may be involved in greater darkness, 
 and may sometimes dote, or fail through old age. 
 
 " This indeed may be conceded, that the Fathers nearer 
 the times of the apostles, as S. Jerome, Aug. &c. were more 
 enlightened than the modern ; but yet the same light is found 
 at this day in the whole body of the church, whilst we learn 
 the truths from their writings which they had been taught 
 more immediately through the unction of the Holy Spirit." 
 
 That the true church of Christ, consisting of believers out 
 of every kindred and nation and tongue and people, will 
 always be preserved from the darkness of ignorance and the 
 delusions of superstition, is a precious truth. Even in the 
 gloomiest days, the true light shines in their souls, and 
 though darkness cover the earth and gross darkness the 
 people, God's children always will have peace and love and 
 joy in the Holy Ghost. But it is not true that there never 
 have been seasons, when religion has fearfully declined, and 
 8* 
 
94 ARTICLES OF FAITH. 
 
 when the visible church has been corrupted. It was so in 
 the days of Elijah, and yet God had preserved to himself 
 7000 who had not bowed the knee to Baal nor kissed his 
 images. It was so in the justly called " dark ages," when 
 the candle of the Lord shone scarcely any where, save 
 among the persecuted Waldenses and Albigenses and Cul- 
 dees, who were hunted like the deer of the forest by the 
 merciless armies of the Pope. 
 
 It is not true that the church of Rome never has been 
 corrupt, and it is equally untrue that she is free from perni- 
 cious error now. 
 
 It is not true that the Romish church is " the pillar and 
 ground of the truth," neither is it true that the apostle desig- 
 nated her, when he spoke of the church of the living God. 
 
 It is not true that no new articles of faith have been added 
 by the authorities of the Romish church since the days of 
 the apostles ; and it is just as untrue that the decrees of 
 Popes and Councils have always been in accordance with 
 the faith once delivered to the saints by the apostles of the 
 XiOrd Jesus Christ. 
 
 These are all points which will recur for discussion in the 
 course of the present work ; meanwhile, therefore, we op- 
 pose a blank denial to the bald assertions • of the Romish 
 Doctor. 
 
 Concerning the Symbol of Faith [or Creed). (24.) 
 
 A symbol of faith is defined as " A summary or collec- 
 tion of certain articles of faith, proposing in a compendious 
 manner the most important things to be believed by all." 
 
 The advantages to be derived from this compendium are, 
 
 " 1. That the faithful might more easily be instructed. 
 
 " 2. That the unity of the faith might more readily be 
 preserved throughout the world. 
 
 " 3. That by the profession of the creed, the faithful might 
 be distinguished from infidels. 
 
 " 4. Lest the faith of the simple might be corrupted by 
 infidels. 
 
ARTICLES OF FAITH. 95 
 
 "There are four creeds, viz. ; the Apostles', the Nicene, 
 the Constantinopolitan, and the Athanasian. 
 
 " The profession of faith, which Pope Pius IV. prescribed 
 from the decrees of the Council of Trent, and appointed to 
 be uttered with an oath by all who are about to be promoted 
 to sacred offices, academical degrees, &c., has the nature, 
 though not the name of a symbol." 
 
 Concerning the Apostles^ Creed, (25.) 
 
 This is the well-known form of sound words, which is 
 familiar to us all — "I believe in God the Father Almighty, 
 Maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ his only 
 Son our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born 
 of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was cru- 
 cified, dead and buried. He descended into hell ; the third 
 day he rose again from the dead ; he ascended into heaven, 
 and sitteth at the right hand of the Father, whence he shall 
 come to judge the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy 
 Ghost, the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, 
 the remission of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life 
 everlasting. Amen." 
 
 " Why is it called the Apostles' creed ? 
 
 " Both because it contains the doctrine and articles preach- 
 ed by the apostles themselves ; and also because it was com- 
 posed by the apostles before they were scattered in the vari- 
 ous parts of the world to preach." 
 
 In the former part of this answer we can heartily concur, 
 but the truth of the latter assertion is more than questiona- 
 ble, as we will show presently. The creed itself we recog- 
 nize as orthodox ; it is associated with the first lessons in 
 religion, which Protestants are taught in their childhood, and 
 if we understood it precisely as the church of Rome ex- 
 plains it, there would be less ground for controversy between 
 us than there is. But whilst we acknowledge that it is a form 
 of sound words, we must be permitted to dissent from the 
 opinion as to the extent of the obligation of knowing it by 
 heart, expressed in the following answers. 
 
96 ARTICLES OF FAITH. 
 
 " Is thare an obligation that the faithful should know the 
 Apostles' creed? 
 
 " Yes : because by divine command we ought to believe 
 the Gospel ; but the creed contains the principal heads of the 
 Gospel : therefore every one ought to believe it, and there- 
 fore to know it. 
 
 "How great is the obligation of knowing the apostles' 
 creed ? 
 
 " 1 answer with S. Charles Borrom., &c. * Every Chris- 
 tian if he is an adult is bound to know all the articles of the 
 apostles' creed, under pain of mortal sin :' understand as to 
 its substance. 
 
 " Are the faithful obliged to know the creed even word 
 for word ? 
 
 " Yes ; and this the common opinion of the faithful proves : 
 this obligation has been introduced either by the apos- 
 tles, or by the custom of the church : and hence it was 
 sanctioned already from the earlier centuries of the church, 
 that boys so soon as they become capable of learning should 
 thoroughly learn before everything else, the creed, and other 
 mysteries of the same necessity. 
 
 " Malderes, Wiggers, Sylvius, &c. teach that although the 
 obligation of knowing the creed word for word, is not im- 
 proper of itself, but only trifling ; yet if any one should not 
 know how to recite it from idle negligence, he could not 
 easily be excused from mortal sin : because such a one for 
 the most part will also be ignorant of the articles as to their 
 substance, and will be found grievously negligent in exer- 
 cising acts of faith, hope, &c. — Hence St. Aug. says, ' I 
 know not with what face he can call himself a Christian, 
 who neglects to acquire the few sentences in the creed and the 
 Lord's prayer.'" 
 
 As to the creed itself, the Romish explanation differs very 
 materially from the Protestant. Thus in the fiflh article, 
 " He descended into hell," there is a comment, which strikes 
 us as rather bold. 
 
 " What is proposed for belief in the first part of the fifih 
 article, ' He descended into the lower regions V 
 
 '■'• Ans, That the soul of Christ separated from the body, 
 
ARTICLES OF FAITH. 97 
 
 descended to the lower regions, and there remained so long 
 as his body was in the Sepulchre. 
 
 " To what place of the lower regions did he descend 1 
 
 " Ans. By the name of the lower regions are meant the 
 secret receptacles in which those souls are detained, who 
 have not obtained celestial happiness : but these as the Roman 
 Catechism teaches, before the resurrection of Christ, were 
 three; viz. the hell of the damned, purgatory and limbus, in 
 which the spirits of the just fully cleansed (from sin) were 
 kept before Christ's coming to them. 
 
 " These things being premised, it is certain that the soul 
 of Christ descended to the ' Limbus Patrum,' and imme- 
 diately rendered their souls happy ; and afterwards, when 
 ascending to heaven took them with him. 
 
 " It is probable that he also penetrated to the place of 
 purgatory, and that he consoled the spirits there detained, 
 and perhaps at the same time liberated at least some from 
 (their) pains. 
 
 " That he descended to the abode of the damned is not 
 probable : yet they could feel the virtue of Christ's descend- 
 
 ing." 
 
 Our Theologian speaks like a book upon this subject. 
 
 " It is certain ! that the soul of Christ descended to the 
 Limbus Patrum &c. — 'Limbus Patrum?' 'Limbus Pa- 
 trum !' Where do you find any mention of such a place in 
 the Word of God? 
 
 The Roman Catechism teaches that " Limbus Patrum" 
 was one of the three abodes of departed spirits — 
 
 The Roman Catechism ! Indeed ! 
 
 And " it is probable that he also penetrated to the place 
 af purgatory &c. 
 
 " Purgatory ?" If I had read no other book but the Bi- 
 ble, I should never have seen the word in my life. But as 
 the Roman Catechism is again adduced as authority, of 
 course that settles the question. What a blessed thing it is 
 that the Roman Catechism has been framed, and that there 
 is an infallible church, from whose decisions there can be no 
 appeal ! 
 
98 ARTICLES OF FAITH. 
 
 *' Observe, that heretics denying the descent of Christ to the 
 lower regions, not less impiously than foolishly understand 
 * hell,' in this connection for the grave : for the burial has 
 evidently been expressed in the fourth article, and would thus 
 be uselessly repeated here in obscure words." 
 
 That the " Apostles' creed," is a symbol of great an- 
 tiquity, cannot be denied ; though its age has no doubt been 
 overrated by Romish authors. Tertullian and Irenoeus al- 
 lude to it : and the whole form as it now stands in the Eng- 
 lish Liturgy, may be found in the works of St. Ambrose, 
 who flourished in the third century ; and also in the writings 
 of Rufinus of the fourth century. But the following con- 
 siderations will have some weight in sustaining the belief 
 that the apostles did not compose any such creed. 
 
 1. Neither St. Luke, nor any other writer before the fillh 
 century, makes any mention of an assembly of the apostles 
 for composing a creed. 
 
 2. The fathers of the first three centuries, in disputing 
 against the heretics, endeavour to prove that the doctrine 
 contained in this symbol, was the same which the apostles 
 taught ; but they never pretend that the apostles composed 
 it. This they certainly would have distinctly asserted, if 
 they had known it to be a fact. 
 
 3. If the apostles had made this creed, it would have 
 been the same in all churches, and in all ages ; and all 
 authors would have cited it in the same manner. But they 
 have not done so. In the second and third ages of the 
 church, there were as many creeds as authors ; and the 
 same author sets down the creed after a different manner in 
 several places of his works, which is an evidence that there 
 was not at that time, any creed reputed to be the apostles' : 
 In the fourth century, Rufinus compares together the three 
 ancient creeds of the churches of Aquileia, Rome, and the 
 East, which differ very considerably, not only in tones and 
 expressions, but even in the articles, some of which were 
 omitted in one or other of them ; and amongst these, " the 
 
ARTICLES OF FAITH. 99 
 
 descent into hell," is one.* As to the meanjng of the 
 phrase, " he descended into hell," we do not feel under obli- 
 gation of any kind to explain it, as we do not acknowledge 
 it to be of divine authority. But lest Romanists should sup- 
 pose that it is impossible to give any rational and scriptural 
 exposition of it, and that we must after all endorse the 
 Roman Catechism, we will state what we suppose to be 
 meant by the phrase, " he descended into hell." 
 
 The Hebrew word, "Sheol," which is rendered hell, 
 or hades, seems originally to design the whole region down- 
 ward from the surface of the earth, to an indefinite and in- 
 conceivable depth. Thus, Job speaking of the unsearch- 
 ableness of the divine perfections, says : " It is high as 
 heaven, what canst thou do ? deeper than hell, what canst 
 thou know?" and Amos, "though they dig into hell, thence 
 shall mine hand take them ; though they climb into heaven, 
 thence will I bring them down." Now as the bodies of 
 persons dying, are as it were, let down into this pit, which 
 becomes the universal grave of mankind ; therefore to die is 
 frequently termed xaTa/3aivEiv J<g a5ou, or xara^sd&ai iig a(5ou, 
 to descend, or be brought down into this hell, which, as it 
 happens to all men indiscriminately, is promiscuously attri- 
 buted to all men without reference to moral character. 
 Hence good Jacob says, "I will go down unto 'hell,' unto 
 my son, mourning," (i. e.) " I will go down to * Sheol,' this 
 common grave of mankind. In this way, the term ' Sheol' 
 was figuratively used for * grave,' and so it is translated by the 
 Septuagint in one passage, Is. xxxviii. 28. * Sheol' (the grave) 
 cannot praise thee ; death cannot celebrate thee ; they that 
 go down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth." If then 
 we understand " the descent into hell," as implying that our 
 Saviour was laid in the common receptacle of the dead, we 
 are sure that there is nothing unscriptural in it; and the 
 
 * See Barrow on the creed, and King's history of the apostles' 
 creed. 
 
100 ARTICLES OF FAITH. 
 
 passage in 
 
 of David, " thou wilt not leave my soul in hell," admits of 
 this interpretation ; for our Saviour's, soul not being left in 
 hell, and not seeing corruption, is explained by Peter as 
 denoting his resurrection. " David," says he, " foresee- 
 ing THIS SPAKE OF ChRISt's RESURRECTION." 
 
 Again, taking " soul" for the living soul, or that faculty 
 by which we live, and hell for the state of death, the words 
 " thou wilt not leave my soul in hell" will be equivalent to 
 this, " thou wilt not suffer me to remain dead, till my flesh 
 has been corrupted," and this seems to have been Paul's 
 view, for it is remarkable that in the 13th of Acts, he omits 
 the former part, " thou wilt not leave nrty soul in hell," and 
 mentions simply the latter, " thou wilt not yield thy Holy 
 One to corruption," thereby implying that the two parts of 
 the text constituted a parallelism, so common in the Hebrew 
 idiom, and were to be understood as synonymous, or expla-' 
 natory one of the other. But then we are told, by adopting 
 this explanation of the words " he descended into hell," we 
 are in fact only repeating what was before stated that " he 
 was dead and buried." To this we reply — 
 
 1. For this we are not accountable — you must blame 
 those who inserted these words. 
 
 2. That to say our Saviour continued in the state of death 
 for a season, does add something to the fact that he was 
 dead and buried. 
 
 3. That far greater inconvenience results from expound- 
 ing the words differently. If they contain a separate article 
 of faith, what are we to to think of the negligence of those 
 fathers, Irenseus, Tertullian, &c. who are so much extolled 
 by Papists, but who certainly knew nothing of many practices 
 and doctrines which are now in vogue among Romanists, 
 and who omitted these words ? And what are we to think of 
 Paul himself, who in 1 Cor. xv. when declaring the sum 
 and substance of what he had both learned and taught con- 
 
ARTICItES OF FAITH. 101 
 
 cerning the last grand scenes in the Saviour's history, says, 
 " I delivered unto you first that Christ died for our sins ac- 
 cording to the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that 
 he rose again the third day" ? Paul says nothing here of 
 his " descending into hell." 
 
 4. If we interpret the word "sheol," or " hell" as mean- 
 ing a separate abode of departed spirits, whether good or 
 bad, we are involved in a dilemma. It can hardly be sup- 
 posed that Christ descended to the abode of lost spirits, for 
 you must remember, he told the penitent thief." This day 
 shalt thou be with me in Paradise.^'' And it will not do to 
 understand " sheol" as meaning the " Paradise" or separate 
 abode of the departed spirits of the just, because it was " in 
 sheol" or " hades," that " Dives lifted up his eyes being in 
 torments," and besides it is said in the apocalypse that 
 " death and hades (sheol) were cast into the lake of fire," 
 and our Romish friends would hardly suppose that "Para- 
 dise" was cast into the burning lake ! 
 
 And again, this explanation supposes "Paradise" to be 
 located in the lowest depths of the earth. Now Paul tells us 
 that when he was carried away to " Paradise," he was 
 " caught Wjp" not down " into the third heaven," and that he 
 was caught up fro Paradise and heard, &c. 2 Cor. xii. 
 
 As for the wild vagaries about the Saviour's going to 
 "Limbus Patrum," and taking with him the souls of the 
 good men, who were therein confined, and the " probability" 
 of his having visited purgatory and taken with him at least 
 some of its inmates, having been taught to " refuse profane 
 and old wives' fables," we leave them just where we find 
 them in Dens' Theology and the Roman Catechism. 
 
 The ninth article teaches — " I believe the Holy Catholic 
 church," and the question is asked — 
 
 "What do we profit by this part of the ninth article : * the 
 Holy Catholic church?' 
 
 " Ans. We believe that there is a true church, which 
 9 
 
102 ARTICLES OF FAITH. 
 
 alone is able to hand down and explain the truths necessary 
 to salvation, and the two fountains of Scripture in which the 
 same are found ; but this church is distinguished by its own 
 marks, viz : that it be Owe, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic ; 
 as the Constantinopolitan creed has it." 
 
 " Concerning the church and its marks, we shall treat 
 hereafter. 
 
 " Wherefore is it here said : I believe the church, and not 
 in the church ? 
 
 " Ans. This is plain from what has been said before ; for 
 this reason that to believe in any one indicates that he is 
 our ultimate end ; but this, God alone is." 
 
 Whilst we cordially acknowledge our belief in the exist- 
 ence of a church which is Holy and Catholic, we must de- 
 cline believing that the Romish church is either the one or 
 the other. We neither believe her, nor do we believe in her. 
 
 The tenth article, " the remission of sins," which we also 
 believe, but in a different sense, is thus explained. 
 
 " What does the tenth article propose, * The Remission 
 of Sins?' 
 
 " Ans. We are taught in this article, these truths of the 
 faith: 
 
 " 1. That no sins in this life, however enormous and mul- 
 tiplied, are unpardonable. 
 
 " 2. That in the church, sins are not only truly remitted, 
 but also that the power of remitting sins has been given to 
 the church through the sacraments of Baptism and Penance. 
 
 " 3. That out of the church (see No. 71.) there is no sal- 
 vation, and therefore no remission of sins. 
 
 " Observe that under the remission of sins, the remission 
 of punishments also ma^ be included." 
 
 We believe that there is provision made for the remission 
 of the sins of all, who come in humble penitence and faith 
 to the Lord Jesus Christ. But the remission of sins, de- 
 scribed above, we cannot recognize. Many of the sections 
 in this connexion treat upon topics connected with the faith, 
 which are interesting but not essential, and we shall be 
 obliged to omit them, as our limits will not permit us to in- 
 sert them. 
 
ARTICLES OF FAITH. 103 
 
 The 45th section is jfollovved by a corollary, from which 
 we learn amongst other things that it is unlawful for Roman- 
 ists to participate in a Calvinistic celebration of the Lord's 
 supper. 
 
 This provision is scarcely necessary, as it is not likely 
 that they would be invited, except on condition of their re- 
 nouncing their connexion with the Romish church. Farther, 
 to assist at the religious services of heretics, by singing, 
 playing the organ, &c., is not permitted. 
 
 " Is it lawful to be present at the preaching of heretics? 
 
 " Ans. This is forbidden in the following cases : 
 
 "1. If by this act, those present might be deemed here- 
 tics. 
 
 " 2. If by this, any one may be exposed to danger of 
 perversion ; and for this reason, illiterate common people 
 cannot without sin listen to the sermons of heretics. 
 
 " 3. If any one by frequenting (their assemblies) should 
 afford occasion for scandal. 
 
 " 4. If any one by his going should afford honour and 
 authority to the minister. 
 
 " 5. If all should be compelled to come to the assemblies 
 of heretics. This is plain from the declaration of Paul V., 
 who being consulted by the Catholics of England, whether 
 they might obey such an edict of the king, replied — * It is 
 not permitted you to do these things without detriment to the 
 worship of God and your own salvation.' 
 
 " When, therefore, says Steyaert, there is liberty, and it is 
 the custom for Catholics and others to go to the preaching or 
 psalm-singing of such like, apart from the fact that thus they 
 may be supposed to countenance such a religion, then it must 
 be considered, whether any one incurs danger, and how 
 great, or whether he occasions scandal by going to these 
 (ceremonies) ; and also of what nature is the reason of 
 going." 
 
 The 47th section discusses the knotty question, whether 
 there is faith in a heretic or not. And the conclusion which 
 is reached is, that he tias neither habitual nor actual faith. 
 The decree of St. Thomas is, that " whoever with obstinacy 
 disbelieves one article of faith, has not the act, nor the habit 
 of faith in relation to the remaining articles." 
 
% 
 
 104 VICES OPPOSED TO THE FAITH. 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 Concerning Vices opposed to the Faith. (48.) 
 
 " What are the vices opposed to the faith 1 
 
 *' Principally these two, infidelity, which is opposed to in- 
 ternal faith, and blasphemy, which is opposed to the profes- 
 sion of faith, of which hereafter. 
 
 " What is infidelity, the vice opposed to the faith ? 
 
 " It is a defective absence of faith ; and thus they are 
 called infidels, who lack faith accompanied with the mani- 
 fest expression of some defect ; for the blessed, (in heaven) 
 although they have not faith, cannot be called infidels, be- 
 cause the absence of faith in them respects perfection, not 
 defect ; but little children not baptized are infidels ; for they 
 want habitual faith, which they would have had, if (in 
 Adam) they had not sinned. 
 
 " But adults not baptized are not always infidels, because 
 through perfect contrition they can be justified befbre bap- 
 tism, and thus possess faith. 
 
 *' It is to be observed, that the infidel is sometimes con- 
 founded with the unbaptized person, and the unbaplized with 
 the infidel, &c. &c. 
 
 " How manifold is infidelity 1 
 
 " It is threefold, viz. : purely negative, privative, and 
 positive, or contrary. The first infidelity is also called in- 
 voluntary ; the two others, voluntary. 
 
 " Infidelity is divided into paganism, Judaism, and heresy, 
 which are called the three kinds of infidelity, of which here- 
 after. 
 
 " What is purely negative infidelity ? 
 
 " It is the want of faith in him who has heard nothing of 
 the faith, nor been able to hear it ; or to whom the faith has 
 certainly not been sufficiently propQsed. 
 
 "What is privative infidelity ? 
 
 " It is the want of faith in him, to whom the faith has 
 been sufficiently proposed,, or who could and ought have 
 acquired for himself the knowledge of the faith, but neglect- 
 ed (ii). 
 
VICES OPPOSED TO THE FAITH. 105 
 
 " What infidelity is called positive, or contrary ? 
 
 " The want of faith, with voluntary error in the faith, 
 through assent of falsehood, or dissent of the truth ; or it is 
 the want of faith in him, who, though sufficiently instructed 
 concerning the faith, maintains an error contrary to the 
 faith." 
 
 The 49th section treats of the kinds of infidelity which 
 are sinful, and the degrees of guilt to be attached to them. 
 Privative and positive infidelity are both sin. Purely nega- 
 tive infidelity is not sin. Thus, the heathen commit no sin 
 in failing to believe the gospel, as it is not possible that they 
 should believe, owing to their ignorance of it. 
 
 " Is voluntary infidelity the greatest sin 1 
 
 " According to St. Thomas, infidelity, from its very na- 
 ture, is a more grievous sin than all offences which can be 
 committed against moral virtues : because infidelity is more 
 directly against God than sins which are opposed to moral 
 virtues. Besides, infidelity also takes away the foundation 
 and root of justification. 
 
 " Yet hatred of God, which is opposed to love, is more 
 grievous than infidelity, as St. Thomas teaches, &c. 
 
 " Observe 1, with St. Thomas, that a sin which, from its 
 very nature, is more grievous, can be less so from certain 
 circumstances. 
 
 " Observe 2, that a believing person committing, v. g. 
 adultery, or another sin, sins more grievously, other things 
 being equal, than an infidel committing the same things, 
 both on account of knowledge of the truth from faith, and 
 on account of the sacraments with which he has been im- 
 bued, to which he offers contempt by sinning. 
 
 " St. Thomas teaches that not every action of an unbe- 
 lieving person is a sin ,* because he may perform some 
 morally good works. 
 
 *' This is plain also from the condemnation of this propo- 
 sition, the 25th among Bajus — 'All works of infidels are 
 sins, and the virtues of philosophers are vices.' 
 
 Concerning the kinds of infidelity, (No. 50.) 
 
 " How many kinds of infidelity are there? 
 "Under the new law there are three, to wit: paganism^ 
 9* 
 
106 VICES OPPOSED TO THE FAITH. 
 
 Judaism, and heresy. To one of these every other infi- 
 delity can be reduced. 
 
 " What is paganism 1 
 
 " It is the unbelief of those who profess Christ neither in 
 figure, nor in the manifestation of the truth ; or who do not 
 acknowledge that any Messiah or Christ has come, and do 
 not expect that he will come. Such are idolaters, atheists, 
 deists, Mahometans, &c. 
 
 " What is Judaism ? 
 
 " It is the unbelief of those who confess the Messiah or 
 Christ in figure only ; or, who deny that Christ has come, 
 but hitherto expect that he will come. 
 
 " What is heresy ? 
 
 " It is the unbelief of those who indeed profess that 
 Christ has come ; but reject his doctrine as proppsed by the 
 church, as to some part — Such are Lutherans, Calvinists, &c. 
 
 " Which kind of infidelity is the most grievous sin? 
 
 *' I answer with St. Thomas, by making a distinction : 
 if infidelity be objectively considered, or with respect to its 
 (subject) matter, then paganism is more grievous than Ju- 
 daism, and Judaism more grievous than heresy : because a 
 pagan errs in more things than a Jew, and a Jew in more than 
 a heretic. If subjectively, or with respect of the obstinacy 
 of the will, and of resistance against the faith, then the worst 
 is heresy, and Judaism (is) commonly more grievous than 
 paganism : because heretics usually have greater knowledge 
 concerning the truths of the faith than Jews, and Jews than 
 pagans ; and thus, heresy is commonly of more grievous 
 guilt. 
 
 " Yet if the truths of the faith had been equally credibly 
 proposed to pagans and Jews ; then paganism would be a 
 more grievous sin than Judaism, and Judaism than heresy." 
 &c. 
 
 Are injidels to he compelled to the faith. (51.) 
 
 *' Infidels who have never been baptized cannot be com- 
 pelled to embrace the faith. Especially, not by the church ; 
 because she has no jurisdiction over unbaptized persons, ac- 
 cording to that 1 Cor. v. 12. — *What, have I to judge them 
 .that are without ?' Neither also, by secular rulers, although 
 
VICES OPPOSED TO THE FAITH. 107 
 
 their superiors : because ihey have only political power, 
 which regards solely the public peace and tranquillity. 
 
 " The examples of Christ, the doctrine and practice of the 
 church, and the rule. Matt. x. prescribed to the apostles in 
 preaching, prove the same thing. 
 
 " Yet it is to be observed, that infidels not baptized, al- 
 though they cannot be compelled to the faith, may yet be 
 obliged by their rulers to observe the law of nature, and 
 thus to abstain from blasphemies against God, idolatry, &c. : 
 the reason is, because right political order is founded in the 
 observance of the law of nature. 
 
 " Infidels also, not subject to a Christian prince, nnay be 
 compelled not to hinder the preaching of the faith in their 
 parts ; the reason is, because the church has the right and 
 power of preaching the gospel through the whole world, 
 which Christ conceded to her. Matt, xxviii. 19, * Teach all 
 nations;' and Mark xvi. 15, 'Preach the gospel to every 
 creature.' 
 
 " If therefore the church be hindered in this right. Christian 
 rulers can, as the defenders of the church by war or other 
 means, restrain those who endeavour to hinder the preaching 
 of the faith. 
 
 " According to Suarez, Herinx, &c., a Catholic ruler can 
 compel infidels subject to him, under pain of exile, to be 
 present at certain times at the preaching of the gospel ; 
 because, according to the constitution of Gregory XIII., Jews 
 living at Rome are compelled every week to be present once 
 at a sermon concerning things of the faith. 
 
 " Ohj. It is said, Luke xiv. 23. * Go out into the highways 
 and hedges, and compel them to come in ;' therefore, all 
 infidels may be compelled to embrace the Christian faith. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference ; for the words of the parable, 
 according to S. Gregory, are understood concerning com- 
 pulsion, improperly so called, which is done through preach- 
 ing, persuasion, showing of miracles, &c. 
 
 " But if with St. Augustine you understand the words 
 concerning compulsion, properly so called, then they are 
 understood concerning heretics and schismatics, who have at 
 some time professed the faith, and who can be compelled. 
 
 " Baptized infidels, such as heretics and apos- 
 tates USUALLY ARE, ALSO BAPTIZED SCHISMATICS, MAY BE 
 
 i 
 
 
 %^ 
 
108 VICES OPPOSED TO THE FAITH. 
 
 compelled, even by cobporeal punishments, to return 
 
 to the catholic faith, and the unity of the church. 
 
 " The reason is, because these by Baptism have 
 
 BECOME subject TO THE CHURCH ,* AND THEREFORE THE 
 church has jurisdiction over them, and THE POWER 
 OF COMPELLING THEM THROUGH APPOINTED MEANS TO 
 OBEDIENCE, AND TO FULFIL THE OBLIGATIONS CONTRACTED 
 IN BAPTISM. 
 
 *' This also holds good in those who have been baptized 
 in infancy, or who have undergone baptism compelled by 
 fear or some necessity ; as the Council of Trent teaches, 
 sess. 7, can. 14, concerning baptism, and the Council of To- 
 ledo, 4th can. 55. 
 
 " Ohj. No one believes unless he is willing; but the will 
 cannot be compelled ; therefore, no one can be compelled to 
 the faith. 
 
 "^715. I deny the inference; for he is not compelled to 
 believe against his will, but from unwilling, to become 
 willing. 
 
 " You will insist : no one can be compelled to baptism, 
 therefore, &c. 
 
 " I answer with St. Thomas, — * Just as it belongs to the 
 will to vow, but to necessity to perform ; so to receive the 
 faith belongs to the will, but to keep it when received to ne- 
 cessity ! However, it is not always expedient for the 
 church to use this right ; as will appear from what is to be 
 said hereafter.' " 
 
 The sections which treat of Heresy and of the manner in 
 which heretics are to be punished, speak for themselves. 
 They will be appreciated by every Protestant, and they are 
 respectfully and especially commended to the attention of 
 those liberal and enlightened apologists for Popery, who tell 
 us that Romanism* has changed for the better. The preceding 
 and following sections prove it to be the same bloody, perse- 
 cuting and cruel religion that it always has been. We bring 
 no gratuitous or railing accusation against the private mem- 
 bers of the Romish church. The vast majority of them are 
 probably ignorant of many of the vile principles with which 
 the minds of their priests are saturated ; but we cannot help 
 
VICES OPPOSED TO THE FAITH. 109 
 
 regarding every man, who has been trained in the theological 
 schools in which such tenets are inculcated, and who has 
 failed to renounce them and the church which enjoins and 
 practises them, as the foe of God and man, and the sworn 
 enemy of our dearest civil and religious rights. It is only 
 expediency^ which restrains Holy Church from attempting 
 to enforce these bloody tenets in our own land, and in the 
 experience of American citizens ! 
 
 In the following sections it is distinctly avowed, amongst 
 other things of scarcely less atrocity, that " heretics are 
 
 JUSTLY PUNISHED WITH DEATH." " HeRESY IS NOT TO BE 
 TRIED, OR PROVED, BUT TO BE EXTIRPATED, UTlleSS there 
 
 should be reasons, which may render its toleration advisa- 
 ble:' 
 
 " ff greater evils would follow or greater benefits be 
 hindered,''^ then forsooth heretics may find some toleration 
 from Holy Mother Church ! Here is an open avowal that 
 so soon as the priests of Rome have the power, they will 
 consummate the atrocities, which their theology inculcates 1 
 
 So soon as they can do it, they are bound by their very 
 principles to compel baptized infidels, such as heretics, 
 i. e. Protestants, even by corporeal punishments to 
 return to the Catholic faith, and the unity of the church! 
 
 And yet some of these very men, who thirst for the blood 
 of Protestants like ravening wolves, put on the sheep's cloth- 
 ing of zeal for liberty, and proclaim their attachment to its 
 institutions from the house tops ! " They bellow as they'd 
 burst the heavens," Our Country ! Our Country ! Ameri- 
 can Independence and Liberty for ever ! Out upon such 
 barefaced hypocrites ! 
 
 But we are accosted by some good men — "Admitting that 
 the principles of Popery are as hideous as the blackness of 
 darkness itself, yet ' where is the danger' to our free institu- 
 tions, which you seem to apprehend from its existence in 
 this country ? The people of the United States are too in 
 
110 VICES OPPOSED TO THE FAITH. 
 
 telligent as a body to fall in love with the cocked hats and 
 cassocks of the priests and the crude absurdities of Popery, 
 and too enthusiastically devoted to the cause of civil liberty, 
 ever to surrender their freedom to the tender mercies of a 
 few designing foreigners !" 
 
 I state in reply : The church of Rome already numbers 
 in her fellowship in the United States, 200,000 members 
 more than the aggregate of all the communicants in the 
 combined Protestant churches ! She claims two millions 
 as the number who bow down to her images in this country. 
 The Protestant churches contain according to a late accurate 
 estimate, 1,800,000. In the aggregate of actual professors, 
 therefore, we are according to her own statement outnum- 
 bered. 
 
 Now, it is true there are millions who avow some of the 
 distinctive principles of Protestantism, who are not in imme- 
 diate communion with any denomination. But on the other 
 hand, there are not a few, whose predilections are in favour 
 of Popery, though they are not enrolled on the registers of 
 Holy Church. And what is the character of the large 
 remnant of our population % 
 
 You will find many useful citizens and valuable members 
 of society, who give themselves little or no concern about 
 religion, but whilst we make provision for these more honour- 
 able exceptions, is it not true that the patriotism of multitudes, 
 who are living without God in the world, who attach them- 
 selves to no place or form of worship, and who care for none 
 of these things, is very questionable ? Should any contingen- 
 cy arise, requiring the exercise of self-denying devotion to 
 the country, how much dependence could be placed on them, 
 if they were tempted to surrender some important principle 
 by an appeal to passion or prejudice ? Read the history of 
 Europe ; and do you not find in repeated instances that the 
 power of the Pope gradually rose from a puny embryo to 
 the stature and vigour of a giant ? First, it asks an asylum, 
 
VICES OPPOSED TO THE FAITH. Ill 
 
 and, from sheer pity for its imbecility, an asylum is granted; 
 and when by sycophancy and subserviency it has wormed 
 itself into places of trust and profit, silently and gradually it 
 accumulates a powerful influence ; at length with the con- 
 sciousness of growing strength, it begins to claim immuni- 
 ties, and when it has secured them, it next affects supremacy ; 
 and when it has gained this, instead of whispering out of the 
 dust, it commands and threatens with a voice of thunder. 
 
 Twenty years ago the man who should have predicted 
 that by this time Popery would be in the ascendency in this 
 country would have been scouted as a fanatic. And with 
 its present power before our eyes, with the voice of history 
 calling to us from every kingdom and empire on the conti- 
 nent of Europe, " Beware of the Beast !" shall we be asked 
 " Where is the danger ?" 
 
 There is danger in the very nature of the fundamental 
 principles of this monstrous system of superstition and cru- 
 elty. Their very enormity screens them by staggering cre- 
 dulity and giving to the truest portraiture the aspect of ex- 
 aggeration. 
 
 There is danger in the insidious and insinuating address 
 of its crafty and unprincipled priesthood, who are the sworn 
 vassals of the Pope. 
 
 There is danger in the indifference and supineness of Pro- 
 testants. 
 
 There is danger in the good-natured liberality of " unsus- 
 pecting Americans." 
 
 There is danger in the vast foreign resources both in men 
 and money, which are at the command of the Holy Fathers 
 in this country, and of which they know how to make use. 
 
 There is danger in the want of principle and patriotism 
 in many ungodly politicians, who to carry personal or party 
 measures will conciliate the votes of Papists at the expense 
 of the constitution. 
 
 There is danger in the corruption and venality of most 
 
112 VICES OPPOSED TO THE FAITH. 
 
 of the public journals, whose publishers connive at the ma- 
 chinations of Popery through fear of losing a little patron- 
 age! 
 
 And there is clanger in the present organized effort to con- 
 centrate the political influence of the Papacy in this country ! 
 
 Concerning the intercourse of the Faithful with 
 Infidels. (52.) 
 
 There is a threefold intercourse specified under this head. 
 
 " The first relates tct those things which pertain to their false 
 religion, in which it is never lawful to communicate with in- 
 fidels by performing their religious services : for this would 
 be to profess their sect ; hence it is lawful neither to make 
 churches, altars, sacerdotal robes, &c." 
 
 " The second is in marriage ; and this intercourse is for- 
 bidden to the faithful in this manner, that if they attempt to 
 contract it with unbaptized persons, the marriage is null and 
 void ; if with a baptized infidel, it is valid indeed, but in 
 itself unlawful." 
 
 " The third is in those things, which relate to civil and 
 political intercourse, such as buying, selling, feasts, &c. in 
 which it is lawful to communicate with infidels, unless they 
 are such, who have by name been denounced by the church 
 as (persons) to be avoided. And although anciently all 
 heretics and all excommunicated persons were to be avoided ; 
 yet in our day from the moderation of the Council of Con- 
 stance in the chap. Ad Evitanda, it is commonly taught, 
 that no excommunicated persons are to be avoided, unless 
 they have been denounced by name, or are notorious trou- 
 blers of the clergy. Hence in our day there is no positive 
 Jaw, which forbids Catholics to communicate with infidels in 
 civil affairs. 
 
 " Yet from the law of nature an obligation of avoiding here- 
 tics and excommunicated persons may arise, viz ; on account 
 of the danger of perversion, or on account of the scandal of 
 others, or when intercourse with them is in the way of their 
 conversion. 
 
 " Is it lawful to dispute with infidels concerning the faith ? 
 
 " Whoever having once embraced the faith, disputes as 
 though doubting concerning the truth of the faith, sins with- 
 out doubt ; as St. Thomas teaches, &c. 
 
VICES OPPOSED TO THE FAITH. 113 
 
 " The case is different with him, who has never embraced 
 the faith and begins to doubt ; such a one lawfully disputes 
 in order to inquire the truth. 
 
 " Disputation with infidels has been permitted to some, if 
 namely the disputants are learned and firm in the faith, and 
 it can be prudently judged that the discussion will be profita- 
 ble : and hence disputation with the obstinate is usually un- 
 lawful, unless there may be hope that it will be profitable to 
 some other person, v. g. on the part of the hearers. 
 
 "It was said: It has been 'permitted to some; be- 
 cause (by chap. 2. concerning heretics in 6,) it has been 
 prohibited to the laity under pain of excommunication to dis- 
 pute concerning the faith. The words are : ' We forbid 
 that it be permitted to any lay person either publicly or pri- 
 vately to dispute concerning the Catholic faith ; but whoever 
 shall do the contrary, shall be bound in the knot of excom- 
 munication.' 
 
 " But according to Suarez, Conink, &c. this law seems 
 abrogated by contrary practice, where there is a great con- 
 course of heretics, as in Belgium, Germany, &c. But under- 
 stand this only of private discussion : for as Henricus declares 
 from S. Ignatius, the holy congregation for propagating the 
 faith decreed A. D. 1664, that it was lawful to no one to 
 dispute with heretics by appointment, except by special 
 license of the Apostolic See, or unless the state of the faith 
 should require it, and there would be danger in delay." 
 
 Of tolerating the rites of Infidels. (53.) 
 
 " Are the rites of infidels to be tolerated ? 
 
 " Ans. The rites of Jews, although they sin in exercising 
 them, can be tolerated with some moderation ; because great 
 good accrues to the church from them, viz : because we 
 have a testimony to our faith from enemies, as by their rites, 
 those things which we believe are represented to us figura- 
 tively. 
 
 " It was said, ' with some moderation ;' because if there 
 be danger that the Jews by their peculiar rites offer scandal 
 to Christians, the church can and ought to restrain or hin- 
 der, as shall be expedient : hence it has been decreed, (Bk. 
 5. Decret. tit. 6. ch. 3 and 7,) that it be not jxirmitted to 
 10 
 
114 VICES OPPOSED TO THE FAITH. 
 
 the Jews to have many synagogues in one state, nor to build 
 new ones in many places. 
 
 " The rites of other infidels, viz. pagans and heretics, in 
 themselves (considered), are not to be tolerated : 
 
 BECAUSE THEY ARE SO BAD, THAT ISO TRUTH OR ADVAN- 
 TAGE FOR THE GOOD OF THE CHURCH CAN BE THENCE 
 DERIVED. 
 
 " Except, however, unless greater evils would follow, or 
 greater benefits be hindered. 
 
 " ObJ. I. The apostle says, Rom. xiv. 5. * Let every man 
 abound in his own sense ;'* therefore liberty of religion is 
 to be left to every one. 
 
 " I deny the inference : for the apostle is not treating of 
 the rites of religion ; but of the observance, or non-obser- 
 vance of the difference between days and meats according 
 to the law of Moses, both of which could at that time be 
 properly done. 
 
 " ObJ. II. The dilemma of Gamaliel, Acts v. 38, where he 
 says of those things, which the apostles did : ' Let them 
 alone : for, if this design or work be of men, it will fall to 
 nothing : but if it be of God, you are not able to destroy it.' 
 
 " Ans. I. This is not a dilemma of Holy Scripture, but 
 of Gamaliel, who by this plausible argument wished to 
 deliver the apostles, to whom he was favourably disposed, 
 from present danger. 
 
 " Ans. II. Admitting that the reasoning of Gamaliel is 
 substantial, there is a disparity, because the case of -infidels 
 is not doubtful to the judges of the church, as the case of 
 the apostles was to the Jews : but it is agreed that it cer- 
 tainly is false and condemned ; and hence it is not to be 
 TRIED, or proved, BUT EXTIRPATED ,' unless there may be 
 reasons, which may render it advisable that it should be 
 tolerated,''^ 
 
 Concerning Heresy in particular. (No. 54.) 
 
 " Heresy is a Greek word, which signifies choice ; be- 
 cause a heretic chooses by his own judgment to believe what 
 he wishes. 
 
 * The Doway translation of the Scripture is unintelligible — the true 
 meaning- is given in the Holy Bible, " Let every man be fully per- 
 suaded in hia own mind." 
 
VICES OPPOSED TO THE FAITH. 115 
 
 " It is sometimes taken objectively for a proposition con- 
 taining some error against the faiih ; however, it is never 
 properly taken objectively for the assent of the understand- 
 ing, about such a proposition, and formal heresy is usually 
 meant, concerning which in the following (chapters.) 
 
 " What is heresy ? 
 
 " It is an obstinate error in the faith of a person profess- 
 ing Christianity. 
 
 " Explain this definition. 
 
 " It is said : * of a person professing Christianity,' that it 
 may be distinguished from Judaism and Paganism. 
 
 " It is said : * an error ;' because heresy is in an erring 
 understanding, as its nearest subject. 
 
 " It is added, ' In the faith,' because heresy imports a 
 corruption of the faith, and is an error concerning those 
 things, which belong to the faith. But something pertains 
 to the faith in a twofold manner : in one way, directly and 
 principally, as the articles of faith ; in the other way, indi- 
 rectly and secondarily, as that corruption of any article 
 which follows from those things which are denied ; and 
 heresy in the same way as faith may be concerning both. 
 
 " But an error concerning other truths or matters of dis- 
 cipline is not called heresy. 
 
 "It is subjoined, 'obstinate;' because heresy imports 
 choice, or that some one knowingly and willingly adheres 
 to an error against the faith ; and hence, without obstinacy, 
 it is not formal heresy, as St. Augustine says, (epist. 16.) 
 ' Without obstinacy I may indeed err, but I shall not be a 
 heretic' 
 
 " And hence the distinction of formal and material heresy, 
 is recognized : for material is an error in the faith without 
 obstinacy. 
 
 " How, if to formal heresy obstinacy is required, can 
 heretics, for instance in Holland, be reputed formal heretics, 
 when they out of ignorance persuade themselves that their 
 own sect is the true religion ? 
 
 " Ans. Although many among them labour under the 
 ignorance by which they think their own sect to be the true 
 religion, yet this very ignorance is usually from an aliena- 
 tion of mind from the faith, and with sufficient obstinacy for 
 heresy ; because the Roman Catholic church had come suf- 
 
116 VICES OPPOSED TO THE FAITH. 
 
 ficiently into their notice, shining forth by her own marks 
 of credibility and the incredibility of their own sect ; from 
 ■which they can well enough discriminate that the Roman 
 Catholic church is the true church of Christ, and is therefore 
 to be heard as an infallible rule, according to which the first 
 revealing truth is manifested to us ; but this church they either 
 reject, or deny to be the only church of Christ. 
 
 " The question is proposed, however, concerning many 
 who hav6 been born and educated among heretics or schis- 
 matics, in how far they can be excused from formal heresy. 
 
 "Steyaert replies, that in this matter it may generally with 
 sufficient certainty be declared that many such, even after 
 they have in the mean time attained to the use of reason, 
 may be as yet excused : because either they hear nothing 
 about the Catholic faith, or not so, that they are as yet suf- 
 ficiently capable of discerning its grounds. Afterwards he 
 adds, that it is very difficult to determine any thing specially ; 
 nor is it necessary to be too liberal in this respect, when we 
 consider the opinions chiefly of the Fathers concerning the 
 certain destruction of those who have not the true faith of 
 Christ." 
 
 Concerning the Division of Heresy. 
 
 " How is heresy divided ? 
 
 " It is divided into formal and material heresy, which 
 division has been explained in the preceding number. 
 
 "Formal heresy is divided into internal and external, 
 also into secret and manifest, 
 
 " Which heresy is called internal, and which external ? 
 
 "Internal is that which lies concealed in the mind, so that 
 it is betrayed by no outward sign. 
 
 " External is that which betrays itself by outward signs, 
 from which, if persons were present, they could know that 
 such a one was a heretic, although perhaps no one may be 
 present who sees these signs ; such as, trampling under foot 
 the Floly Scripture, images of Christ and the saints, done in 
 an heretical spirit. 
 
 "Which heresy is called secret, and which manifest? 
 
 " Secret heresy is that of him who has not yet been 
 known as such by a considerable part of the community. 
 
VICES OPPOSED TO THE FAITH. 117 
 
 " The heresy is called manifest of him who is known as 
 a heretic by a considerable part of the community. 
 
 " What are the punishments of the crime of heresy? 
 
 "Ans. 1. Merely internal heresy in this age has no 
 punishment, nor does it constitute a reserved case. 
 
 " Ans. 2. External heresy has the annexed greater excom- 
 munication of an enacted sentence, and reserved to the Pope. 
 
 " The second penalty is irregularity, for which see Tract 
 concerning Censure &c. 
 
 " The third penalty is disqualification for public benefice 
 and office, &c. 
 
 '* The fourth penalty is privation of benefices and digni^ 
 ties : &c. 
 
 "The fifth is the privation of spiritual jurisdiction as well 
 in the internal as in the external court : however understand 
 this with the qualification appointed in the Council of Con- 
 stance : (See No. 52 ;) hence so long as they are not de- 
 nounced by name, or do not themselves recede from the 
 church, they do not lose jurisdiction, and therefore absolve, 
 dispense, &c. validly. (See Sylvius, &c.) 
 
 " 6. Notorious heretics are infamous of course, and are 
 deprived of ecclesiastical burial. 
 
 " 7. Their temporal goods are of course confiscated : yet 
 a declaratory opinion concerning the crime from the ecclesi- 
 astical judge, ought to precede the execution : because the 
 cognizance of heresy belongs to the ecclesiastical court. 
 
 " Finally they are deservedly visited with other penalties, 
 even corporal, as exile, imprisonment, &c, 
 
 " Are heretics rightly punished with death? 
 
 " St. Thomas answers, (2. 2. quest, xi. art. 3. in corp.) 
 Yes, because forgers of money, or other disturbers 
 OF the state, are justly punished with death ; 
 therefore also heretics, who are forgers of the 
 faith, and experience being the witness, grievously 
 
 disturb THE STATE. 
 
 " It is confirmed by this that God under the old law or- 
 dered the false prophets to be slain, and Deut. xvii. 12, de- 
 creed that, ' He that will be proud and refuse to obey the 
 priest — shall die.' See also chap. x. v. 19. 'But he that 
 will not hear his words, which he shall speak in my name, 
 I will be the revenger.' 
 ,10* 
 
118 CONCERNING BLASPHEMY. 
 
 "The same is proved by the condemnation of the 14th 
 art. of John FIuss in the Council of Constance. 
 
 " It is to be observed that persons not baptized do not in- 
 cur the above-named penahies, which have been appointed 
 by the church, because not subject to the church ; apostates, 
 however incur them, that is, they who after Baptism go over 
 to the Jews or pagans. 
 
 "Are those who return from heresy to be received by the 
 church ? 
 
 " I answer with S. Thom. quest. 11. art. 4 ; returning he- 
 retics are always to be received to penance ; although they 
 may have relapsed frequently : both, because by penance 
 they are brought back into the way of salvation, and because 
 the church closes her bosom against no one returning to her. 
 But they are not always to be restored to their former 
 honours, dignities or offices, neither are they always to be 
 liberated from all punishment, especially when they have re- 
 lapsed into heresy." 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 Concerning Blasphemy. (57.) 
 
 " What is blasphemy 1 
 
 " Ans. Blasphemy as it is understood by the Fathers and 
 Theologians, is reproachful speech against God, or that by 
 which J through means of reproach, something is detracted 
 from the honour and excellence of God : and hence you 
 will easily distinguish it from the sin of infidelity, perjury, 
 &c. 
 
 " It is said : Speech, either external and of the mouth, or 
 internal and of the heart. Against God, either against him- 
 self, or against his creatures in so far as they belong to God, 
 and the divine holiness and power shine forth in them, &;c. 
 Reproachful ; because it is done in opposition to God, against 
 whom, as everywhere present, every curse is a real insult. 
 
 " Observe, that to constitute blasphemy it is not required, 
 that it proceed from hatred or indignation against God, or 
 
CONCERNING BLASniEMY. 119 
 
 that there be an expressed or formal intention of reproaching 
 God ; but that it is enough that the words, or the mode of 
 pronouncing them as to themselves, may tend to the reproach 
 or dishonour of God. 
 
 " How is blasphemy divided ? 
 
 "Aras. It is divided into blasphemy of the heart and of 
 the mouth. Blasphemy of the heart is internal or mental ; 
 of the mouth it is external, which discloses (itself) externally 
 through words or other signs. 
 
 " It is divided into immediate and mediate. 
 
 "That is called immediate, which contains a reproach 
 directly and proximately against God ; mediate is that which 
 proximately relates to the saints or to other things, in so far 
 as they have relation to God : for then this insult is reflected 
 upon God; and thus all blasphemy is against God either 
 immediately or mediately. 
 
 " It is divided into enunciative, defamatory, and impreca- 
 tive. Enunciative h\3.sTphemy is committed, either by affirm- 
 ing something concerning God which is repugnant to him, 
 or by denying that which is consistent for him ; or by as- 
 cribing something to creatures, which properly belongs to 
 God alone. 
 
 " Defamatory is committed by affirming any thing which 
 truly pertains to God ; or by denying that which is not con- 
 sistent for him, but in a reproachful manner, either through 
 contempt or ridicule : for instance, if any one should find 
 fault with Christ that he has suffered, died, &c. ; or should 
 reproachfully mention the blood of Christ, his members, the 
 sacraments-, &c. 
 
 ^^ Imprecative is that, when any one wishes or imprecates 
 evil to God or the saints; such is that execrable French 
 blasphemy, Mort Dieu, by which they imprecate death upon 
 everlasting life. 
 
 " Blasphemy is divided into heretical and not heretical ; 
 heretical is that which contains heresy like this : * Je renie 
 Dieu (I deny God.') 
 
 "Finally, there is one blasphemy against the Father, 
 another against the Son, and another against the Holy 
 Ghost ; in so far as they are opposed to the appropriation, 
 by which are specially attributed, power to the Father, 
 wisdom to the Son, and goodness to the Spirit ; thus, Matt. 
 
12e CONCERNING BLASPHEMY. 
 
 xii., that is called blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, by 
 which the manifest works of the Holy Spirit are ascribed to 
 the devil. 
 
 Concerning the sin of Blasphemy. (58.) 
 
 "To what virtue is blasphemy repugnant? 
 
 " Ans. All blasphemy is repugnant to the virtue of reli- 
 gion ; because it is contrary to the honour and reverence 
 due to God. 
 
 " According to St. Thomas, all blasphemy of the mouth is 
 opposed to the confession of faith ; but not properly accord- 
 ing to Sylvius. It is certain that external heretical blas- 
 phemy is opposed to the confession of faith, because by it 
 something repugnant to the faith is asserted ; if such a blas- 
 phemer inwardly feels with obstinacy as he has spoken, he 
 will be a formal heretic. 
 
 "Are all blasphemies sins of the same kind? 
 
 "A/is. Although scholastics differ in theory, yet they 
 agree in practice, that the quality of the blasphemy is to be 
 expressed in confession, whether it has proceeded from 
 hatred or indignation, or a reproachful spirit against God or 
 the saints, or from an heretical spirit ; also, whether it was 
 immediate or mediate, or against the Mother of God, or 
 against other saints : the reason is, because one blasphemy 
 may be distinguished from another, if not in kind, at least in 
 degree. 
 
 " Moreover, all these things are usually ascertained by 
 inquiring what words were spoken, and in what spirit, or on 
 what occasion ; which is the more to be observed in prac- 
 tice on account of the so great ambiguity of this word, to 
 smear, among the common people, so that not even the kind 
 of sin is sufficiently expressed. 
 
 " Farther observe that they may sometimes use profane 
 phrases with a blasphemous spirit, and blasphemous phrases 
 with a profane spirit. 
 
 " Besides, under the word, to swear, the common people 
 sometimes include words which sound badly, or curses aimed 
 at creatures, which in themselves contain only venial sin : 
 although one can sin mortally from some other source, by 
 reason of an erroneous conscience, a desire of injuring a 
 neighbour, &c." 
 
CONCERNING BLASPHEMY. 121 
 
 In the remainder of this section the question of the great- 
 ness of the sin of blasphemy is discussed. It is a mortal 
 sin, and cannot under any circumstances be venial; it is 
 worse than homicide, perjury, &c. Blasphemy uttered in a 
 joke is a mortal sin ; " because God is too great, and the 
 saints his friends are too excellent to be exposed to our jokes 
 or derision." But the case is different if for instance, by way 
 of hyperbole, any one should call a woman a goddess ; or 
 if by way of joke or levity a person should speak of the 
 saints, not as saints, but merely as men ; " as if any one 
 should say by way of jest, that St. Crispin was a cobbler," 
 he would sin however by speaking thus irreverently, but 
 not mortally, &c. 
 
 Blasphemy in its theological sense is a sin, which from its 
 very nature can be committed against God alone. The word 
 is of Greek origin, and was anciently used as equivalent to 
 " defamation," and applied just as we employ that word to 
 designate an offence against truth or due regard for a neigh- 
 bour's reputation. In Scripture, the word " blasphemy" 
 designates " reproachful speech against God," and is never 
 employed in an inferior sense. The word of God never 
 speaks of blasphemy against the saints. Hence to our mind 
 there appears to be a taint of blasphemy in defining the sin 
 as one which can be committed against other beings besides 
 God. It is a presumptuous addition to " the words, which 
 the Holy Ghost teaches," and therefore it is to be reprobated. 
 
 But one of the grossest and most appalling forms of blas- 
 phemy which the Devil has ever invented, is that which 
 designates the Virgin Mary, as the Mother of God ! Not 
 content with this, Romish authors speak of the Virgin's 
 Mother Anna, as the Grandmother op God ! And when 
 we shudder at this horrid impiety, the poor Papist looks at 
 us in amazement, and asks, " What ! Do you mean to deny 
 that Jesus Christ is God? And was not Mary, the Mother 
 of Christ 1 And hence is it not clear that she is the Mother 
 OF God ?" 
 
192 CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 
 
 I know that Jesus Christ is very God — but he was also 
 very man ; and his relation to his earthly parent could not 
 possibly extend farther than his human nature. How can 
 the woman Mary, highly favoured as she was, be the mother 
 of the Eternal God ? I am pained in my very soul to think 
 that rational and professedly religious men can be guilty of 
 this daring and outrageous blasphemy 1 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 Concerning Rules of Faith, (59.) 
 
 " A RULE of faith is here called some stable and perma 
 nent principle, which applies to us an object of the Catholic 
 faith, or by which the first revealing truth, and things divine- 
 ly revealed to us are manifested, and infallibly known with 
 sufficient credibility. 
 
 " But there are five rules of this kind, of which two are 
 inanimate and three animate. 
 
 *' The inanijnate rules of faith contain the truths of the 
 Catholic faith, in the manner of a deposit, and are Holy 
 Scripture, and Divine Tradition. 
 
 *' The animate rule of faith is that which declares to us 
 the truths which God has revealed, so that it may propose 
 them with sufficient authority, to be believed as it were by a 
 divine faith ; and it is threefold, viz. the Church, the general 
 Council, and the Pope determining " ex-cathedra." The 
 Gallicans deny that concerning the Pope; yet all admit that 
 provisionally at least, we must abide by his decree. 
 
 " Concerning these things, we will tffeat in order, but 
 briefly: Bellarmine, Sylvius in his Treatise concerning the 
 Controversies of the faith, and others discuss the same at 
 large. 
 
 Concerning Holy Scripture. (60.) 
 
 " Holy Scripture is usually designated by various names ; 
 by way of eminence, it is called simply Scripture^ also the 
 
CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 123 
 
 Bible, Sacred Writ, and the Testament of God, also the 
 word, &c. of God. 
 
 *' What is Holy Scripture 1 
 
 " It is the written word of God, God inspiring and dic- 
 tating it. 
 
 " The word of God is divided into written, and unwritten, 
 or into Holy Scripture, and divine Tradition. Concern- 
 ing Tradition, we shall treat hereafter. 
 
 " Has the Holy Scripture been dictated by God, not only 
 as to matter and sentences, but also as to each word, letter, 
 point, &c. ? 
 
 ^^ Ans. Yes; and it is proved from 2 Tim. iii. 16. *A11 
 Scripture divinely inspired;' also from 2 Pet. i. 21. *For 
 prophecy came not by the will of man at any time ; but the 
 holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost ;' and 
 Matt. V. 18. *Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one 
 tittle shall not pass from the law till all be fulfilled.' 
 
 " This also conduces to the greater dignity and authority 
 of Scripture : nor do we otherwise sufficiently understand, 
 how the Holy Fathers can testify that the tongues and hands 
 of the Sacred writers, and the writers themselves were the 
 pens and amanuenses of the Holy Spirit ; also that each 
 word, syllable, and point in the Scriptures are full of im- 
 port. 
 
 " Does it concern the essence of Holy Scripture, that it 
 has been dictated by God, as to single words ? 
 
 " Ans. The affirmative opinion is the more common ; 
 because Holy Scripture is the word of God ; but that which 
 has not been dictated by God, is not the word of God ; 
 therefore if some words were not dictated by God, they do 
 not belong to Holy Scripture. 
 
 " Concerning ihis thing more is to be seen in the censures 
 and justification of Lovanian, and Duacensian Doctors, 
 against these thre^ assertions of Lessius, of which the first 
 is ; that in order that something be Scripture, it is not neces- 
 sary that every word of it should have been inspired by the 
 Holy Spirit. 
 
 '* The second : It is not necessary that the single truths 
 and sentences were inspired into the writer himself, imme 
 diately by the Holy Spirit. 
 
 *' The third : Any book (such as perhaps the second of 
 
124 CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 
 
 Machabees, is) written by human industry, withoiJt the as- 
 sistance of the Holy Spirit, is made Scripture, if the Holy 
 Spirit afterwards testifies that there is nothing false there. 
 
 ^^Ohj.I. Therefore our vuIgate is not Holy Scripture; 
 because it was not dictated by the Holy Spirit as to single 
 words. 
 
 " Ans. I admit our vulgate, (i. e.) that version was not 
 dictated as to single words : I deny that it was not dictated 
 as to single words in its fountain, or in the original, whence 
 our vulgate has been translated, and with which it is con- 
 sidered the same. 
 
 " Whence remark, that the question is understood con- 
 cerning the original, not concerning translations into other 
 tongues, except in so far as by agreement with the original, 
 they are considered the same with it, as to authority, infalli- 
 bility and equivalence of truth and doctrine : and thus our 
 vulgate is called, and is equivalently Holy Scripture, because 
 the Church in the Council of Trent. Sess. 4. declared our 
 vulgate to be authentic. 
 
 " Ohj. II. The diversity of amanuenses does not make a 
 diversity of style, if the same one is dictating ; but the style 
 of the sacred books which were written by divers individuals 
 is different ; therefore the same person was not dictating. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference ; because God in dictating 
 chose to accommodate himself to the mind and condition of 
 the writers, suggesting such words as were familiar to each ; 
 and thus directing them, as if they had written by his 
 (mind.) 
 
 " Hence Solecisms and other defects of writing are not to 
 be imputed to the dictating spirit, but to the writer ; almost 
 in a similar way as if a good writer had made use of a 
 defective pen, the defect of the writing would be imputed to 
 the pen, not to the writer. 
 
 " Obj. III. The author of the second |^ok of Machabees, 
 XV. 39, begs pardon, if he has not written the history with 
 sufficient dignity and propriety. (' 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,') and ii. 24., he con- 
 fesses himself the abbreviator of Jason the Cyrenian. (' All 
 such things as have been comprised in five books by Jason 
 of Cyrene, we have attempted to abridge in one book j') the 
 
CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 125 
 
 same says, v. 27, that he had undertaken not an easy task, 
 but a business full of watching and sweat, (' and as to our- 
 selves, indeed, in undertaking this work of abridging, we 
 have taken in hand no easy task, yea, rather a business full 
 of watching and sweat ;') but all these things could not be 
 said by him to whom all and every word had been divinely 
 given by inspiration ; therefore, «Sz;c. 
 
 " Ans. As to the first point, the reason has already been 
 given. As for the second, nothing is said to hinder that the 
 Holy Spirit should select some things from books written by 
 human skill, and cause them to be written down by some 
 one to whom he may dictate the single items. To the third, 
 the answer is given, that the inspiration of the Holy Spirit 
 does not exclude the labour and study of inquiry ; for the 
 writers were so moved in writing that they moved them- 
 selves : indeed it might be concealed from them, that they 
 were in this manner moved by God ; in the same way as it 
 was concealed from Caiaphas, that he prophesied by divine 
 suggestion, John xi. 50. * Neither do you consider that it is 
 expedient for you that one man should die for the people, 
 and that the whole nation perish not,' to which the Evange- 
 list subjoins, 51. 'And this he spoke not of himself; but 
 being the high priest of that year, he prophesied that Jesus 
 should die for the nation.' 
 
 " Obj. IV. One and the same voice of God the Father, 
 uttered at the baptism of Christ, is related in different words 
 by different writers ; by Matthew iii. 17. ' This is my be- 
 loved Son, in whom I am well pleased,' and by Mark i. 11. 
 'Thou art my beloved son, in thee I am well pleased,' 
 therefore, &c. 
 
 • " Ans. I deny the inference : the reason is, because that 
 voice of the father is alleged only in a relative sense ; he 
 who relates the words of another is supposed merely to 
 relate their substance; but Holy Scripture is the peculiar 
 and immediate word of God, in the positive sense, and 
 therefore it ought to be such as to single words." 
 
 The divine inspiration of the Scriptures is a doctrine 
 
 which is dear to every Christian. We believe that " Holy 
 
 men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost," 
 
 and that, thus, the Bible was prepared by the direct sugges- 
 
 11 
 
126 CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 
 
 tion of God ; and we know that it is a revelation of his will, 
 from evidence which none of its adversaries can ever gainsay. 
 The heavenly sentiments which the Scriptures contain ; the 
 spirituality of their design ; the majestic simplicity of their 
 style ; the artless and disinterested candour of the writers ; 
 their harmony in innumerable instances in which collusion 
 was impossible ; the wonderful power of the doctrines of 
 Scripture on the hearts and consciences of men of every 
 rank, condition, and country; their astonishing preserva- 
 tion ; the multitude of miracles wrought to confirm them, 
 and the exact fulfilment of their predictions up to this hour, 
 sufficiently prove the Scriptures to be indeed the word of the 
 living God. Whether this inspiration is in the most abso- 
 lute sense, plenary, or entire, has been, and still is a dis- 
 puted point. Whilst all evangelical Christians insist upon 
 the inspiration of the doctrines, sentiments, &c. of the 
 Bible ; there are some, who contend that the divine superin- 
 tendence extended only to them, and not to the language in 
 which they are clothed. 
 
 Paul affirms that he and the other apostles spoke not " in 
 the words, which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the 
 Holy Ghost teacheth ;" and a little reflection will suffice to 
 show the importance of a proper selection of these words. 
 We know how easily the-beauty and efficacy of a discourse 
 may be marred by impropriety of language ; if then, the 
 sacred writers had not been directed in the choice of words, 
 is it not certain, as many of them were illiterate men, that 
 they would have expressed themselves inaccurately, and 
 consequently have obscured and misrepresented the truth? 
 How then could our faith rest securely on their testimony ? 
 We must infer, therefore, that the words of Scripture are 
 from God, as well as the matter. Nor can we recede from 
 this conclusion, on account of the verbal discrepancies, to be 
 found in some texts of Scripture, which contain a repetition 
 of what is asserted in other passages, though it be expressly 
 
CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 127 
 
 stated before each that the Lord made the communications 
 in these words. We must concede to the Holy Spirit the 
 same latitude in the use of language universally claimed, by 
 men in similar cases ; and whilst it is obvious that as the 
 words were spoken only once, they could not be communi- 
 cated exactly under both the forms in which they now ap- 
 pear ; yet for every, useful and practical purpose the lan- 
 guage consists of the identical words spoken on the occa- 
 sion. 
 
 But whilst we agree with the Church of Rome, in the 
 essential points of her theory of the plenary inspiration of 
 the Scripture, we protest against all other rules of faith 
 except the genuine Canonical Scriptures. We cannot re- 
 cognize the Apocrypha as any part of divine Revelation, 
 because internal and external evidence are both against it. 
 The apology which is offered for the second book of Macha- 
 bees, appears exceedingly lame ; if the reader will recur 
 to the third objection which our author attempts to refute, 
 he will scarcely be convinced by the "answer" which 
 follows it, that Judas Machabseus was inspired. There 
 is a weakness and insipidity about him, which is utterly 
 foreign to the inspired writers ; and the excuses and apolo- 
 gies which he offers, are, in fact, equivalent to a direct dis- 
 claimer of inspiration. The special plea that " nothing is 
 said to hinder that the Holy Spirit should select some things 
 from books written by human skill, and cause them to be 
 written down by some one to whom he may dictate the sin- 
 gle items," is a fair specimen of Romish casuistry. On the 
 same ground, we can prove that Caesar's Commentaries are 
 inspired. As for the allusion to the prophecy of Caiaphas, 
 we need only remark, as it is evident the High Priest was 
 not aware of the meaning which may properly be affixed to 
 his words, that John simply records the fact as worthy of 
 note, that this wicked High Priest should unconsciously have 
 uttered so true a sentiment. God may verify the words of 
 
128 CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 
 
 wicked men in a remarkable manner, but does that prove 
 that Judas Machabseus was inspired ? 
 
 Concerning the Division of Holy Scripture. (61.) 
 
 The only point worthy of special notice in this section is 
 that which relates to the Apocrypha. The Scriptures are 
 divided into the Old and New Testament ; and the books of 
 both Testaments are distinguished into legal, such as Gene- 
 sis, Exodus, and the four gospels; historical, such as 
 Joshua, Judges, and Acts of the Apostles ; doctrinal, as 
 Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, &c., and the Epistles of the New 
 Testament ; prophetical, as Isaiah, Jeremiah, &c., and the 
 Apocalypse. 
 
 *'The books of Holy Scripture are called canonical, 
 because they have been recorded by the church upon a 
 canon or catalogue of divine books ; and also because they 
 contain the model or rule which we ought to follow both in 
 faith and customs. These the Council of Trent reviews, 
 sess. 4, viz., of the Old Testament, 45, of the New Testa- 
 ment, 27, and so altogether 72 ; and commands them, under 
 pain of anathema, to be held for divine. 
 
 " The canon of the books of the Old Testament is two- 
 fold : one Jewish, the other Christian. 
 
 " Among the sacred books which the church recognizes 
 as such, some are called protocanonical, and others deutero- 
 canonical. 
 
 " The former are those concerning which there never has 
 been any doubt among the faithful. 
 
 " The latter are those concerning which, although they 
 are now recorded on the canon of sacred books, yet anciently 
 it was doubted whether they were Holy Scripture ; of this 
 nature are, from the Old Testament, the Book of Tobias, 
 Judith, the Book of Wisdom, of Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, the 
 Epistles of Jeremiah, First and Second Machabees, fragments 
 or additions of Esther, from chap. x. v. 4, to the end ; and 
 additions of Daniel, viz. chap. iii. ; the Song of the Three 
 Children, the History of Susanna, and the History of Bel and 
 the Dragon. From the New Testament, the Epistle of Paul to 
 the Hebrews, Epistle of James, Second of Peter, Second and 
 Third of John, Epistle of Jude and the Apocalypse ; also, 
 the last chapter of St. Mark, from v. 9 ; the history of the 
 
CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 12^ 
 
 bloody sweat, and of the comforting by the angel (Luke 22) ; 
 the history of the adulterous woman, John viii. ; and v. 7, 
 chap.v. Epist. 1 of St. John : ' For there are three who. bear 
 record in heaven, the Father,' &c. 
 
 " Farther, as well the deutero as the protocanonical are of 
 equal dignity and authority among Catholics. 
 
 "To the canonical books are opposed the apocryphal, 
 which are so called because the church did not receive them 
 into the canon, because it could not find a well-founded tra- 
 dition concerning them, although some of the Fathers some- 
 times questioned their divinity ; such are the third and fourth 
 Book of Esdras, the third and fourth of Machabees ; the 
 prayer of King Manasseh when a captive, &c. Among the 
 apocryphal books some are positively apocryphal or repro- 
 bated ; such are those which Pope Gelasius condemns, &c. ; 
 others are negatively apocryphal, i. e., neither approved as 
 divine by the church, nor reprobated. 
 
 " Can an apocryphal book become canonical ? 
 
 "A positively apocryphal book cannot be made canonical ; 
 but one which is only negatively apocryphal can become 
 canonical : for nothing hinders a book to be sacred, and the 
 fact to be unknown for some time in the church, but after- 
 wards to be known ; as happened concerning the book of 
 Judith, Esther, &c. 
 
 *' May a canonical book also become apocryphal 1 
 
 " Ans. Yes ; viz., if either the notice of its canonization 
 perishes, or is mixed with so many extraneous additions that 
 the divine can no more be discerned from the human. These 
 things are easily perceived' from the manner in which some 
 things can begin or cease to be (matters) of faith," &c. 
 
 The ancient writings which are introduced in the foregoing 
 list of Old Testament apocrypha, and which are of equal dig- 
 nity and authority among Papists as the genuine Scriptures, 
 were never recognized either by the Jewish or Christian 
 church as constituting any portion of the genuine Scriptures. 
 And yet, whoever disputes their authenticity is " anathema," 
 according to the decree of Holy Mother : i. e., cursed in this 
 world, and damned in the next / A very severe sentence, we 
 think, for presuming to question the truth of stories, some of 
 II* 
 
130 CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 
 
 which the earliest fathers of the Christian church denounced 
 as fahles. We are not surprised, however, at the zeal of 
 the church of Rome in behalf of the Apocrypha, because 
 she depends on some of these spurious scriptures for impor- 
 tant testimony, by which to sustain a few of her corrupt 
 practices. Now, as she can ill afford to lose an iota of such 
 evidence, with our knowledge of her temper we do not 
 wonder that she is indignant whenever the Apocrypha is 
 assailed. Popish anathemas in our day are considered 
 apocryphal arguments, and are calculated to excite the 
 mirth rather than convince the judgment of all except the 
 faithful, and therefore with the full knowledge that we incur 
 the curse of Holy Mother, we shall notwithstanding offer our 
 reasons for rejecting the Old Testament Apocrypha. 
 
 1. They possess no authority whatever, either internal or 
 external, to warrant their insertion in the sacred canon. 
 Not one of them is extant in Hebrew ; all of them are in 
 the Greek language, except the fourth book of Esdras, 
 which is extant only in Latin. Their authors for the most 
 part were Alexandrian Jews, who wrote subsequently to the 
 cessation of the prophetic spirit, though before the promul- 
 gation of the Gospel. 
 
 2. Not one of them professes to be inspired ; and their 
 writings were never received into the Jewish canon, and 
 therefore were not sanctioned by the Saviour. 
 
 3. No part of the Apocrypha is at any time quoted either 
 by Christ or any of his apostles ; neither does Philo or 
 Josephus, who wrote in the first century, make any allusion 
 to them. 
 
 4. The Apocryphal books were not admitted into the 
 canon of Scripture at all, until after the fourth century. 
 They are wanting in the catalogue of inspired writings made 
 by Melito, bishop of Sardis, in the second century ; they are 
 not in Origen'a catalogue in the third century; and they 
 are omitted in the catalogues of Athanasius, Hilary, Cyril 
 
CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 131 
 
 of Jerusalem, Epiphanius, Gregory Nazianzen, Amphilo- 
 chius, Jerome, Rufinus, and others of the fourth century ; nor 
 are they mentioned in the catalogue of canonical hooks recog- 
 nized by the council of Laodicea held in the same century. 
 5. The Apocrypha, not\yithstanding the veneration in 
 which its books were held by the Romish church, was never 
 formally recognized as possessing the same authority as the 
 genuine Scriptures, until the last council of Trent at its fourth 
 session, with characteristic impudence, presumed to place 
 them all (except the prayer of Manasseh, and the third and 
 fourth books of Esdras,) in the same rank with the inspired 
 writings of Moses and the prophets. 
 
 . As for the epistles and portions of the New Testament, 
 which are included in the list of deuterocanonical books, 
 their authenticity was sufficiently established in the early 
 ages of the church, and there is internal evidence enough to 
 convince all who read them that they are genuine. They 
 need no apology. 
 
 Concerning the Meanings of Holy Scripture. (62.) 
 
 "What is the sense of Holy Scripture? 
 
 " Aws. It is that signification, which the words of Scrip- 
 ture immediately, or mediately signify by the intentiorl of 
 the Holy Spirit. 
 
 " The sense is divided into literal and mystical. 
 
 " Literal is subdivided into proper , and improper, or meta- 
 phorical. 
 
 ^' Mystical is subdivided into allegorical, anagogical, and 
 tropological, or moral. 
 
 " The proper literal sense, is that which the words taken 
 in their proper meaning immediately signify ; such is the 
 sense of these words, ' thou shalt worship the Lord thy God ; 
 thou shalt not kill,' &c. in which no figure, or metaphor, is 
 to be sought. 
 
 " The improper literal, or the metaphorical sense, is that 
 which is immediately signified by words improperly, or 
 figuratively taken ; such as is the meaning in this sentence 
 of Matt. V. 29. ' If thine eye offends thee, pluck it out,' 
 
132 CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 
 
 6z;c. where eye is not taken properly for the organ of the 
 body, but figuratively for a thing as necessary and accept- 
 able as the eye is. 
 
 " It is the same, when an arm is attributed to God ; for 
 by it is not meant some corporeal member, but metaphori- 
 cally divine virtue and power, also, when Christ is called a 
 lamb, vine, &c. these things ought to be taken metaphorical- 
 ly ; and generally words are to be understood metaphorical- 
 ly, when a false, impious, or absurd sense would follow from 
 them if properly taken. 
 
 " The mystical sense is then defined to be that, * which is 
 denoted over and above the things signified by the words ;' 
 thus this sentence, Ex. xii. 46. * You shall not break a 
 bone thereof,' was spoken literally of the paschal lambs, and 
 rwystically of Christ, as appears from John xix. 36. 
 
 " Farther, the mystical sense is threefold, viz., the first is 
 allegorical, when the things signified by the words, inti- 
 mate something pertaining to the church militant, and the 
 instruction of the faith. An example is afforded, Gal. iv. in 
 the two sons of Abraham, Ishmael born of the bond-woman, 
 and Isaac of the free-woman, who prefigured the Old and 
 New Covenant. 
 
 " The second, the anagogical (sense) is that, when the 
 things signified by the words import something pertaining to 
 the church triumphant, and is referred to hope; thus the 
 entrance of the Israelites into Palestine, after various afflic- 
 tions, and conflicts, signified that through many tribulations 
 we must enter the kingdom of heaven. 
 
 " The third, the tropological, or moral (sense) is, when 
 actions are the signs of those things, which we ought to do ; 
 thus from the command, Deut. xxv. 4; 'thou shalt not 
 muzzle the ox that treadeth out thy corn on the floor,' the 
 apostle proves, 1 Cor. ix. 11, that support is due to the 
 preachers of the gospel from those to whom they proclaim 
 it. ' If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great 
 matter if we reap your carnal things,' and v. 14. *The 
 Lord ordained that they who preach the gospel should live 
 of the gospel,' &c. 
 
 " This one word Jerusalem embraces these four mean- 
 iTigs : for in the literal sense, it signifies the well-known 
 metropolis of Palestine ; allegorically, it signifies the church 
 
CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 133 
 
 militant ; tropologically, or morally, the soul of a just man ; 
 and anagogicalhj, the church triumphant." 
 
 All Scripture has a literal ; but not every Scripture has a 
 mystical sense. 
 
 " Besides the already named senses of Sacred Scripture, 
 is there not another, which is called the accommodatory ?* 
 
 " Ans. The accommodatory sense is, that which is neither 
 immediately signified by the words, nor mediately by the 
 things designated in the words, but which is applied, or 
 accommodated to signify something else, v. g. by the 
 preacher: and hence, it is not properly the sense of Sacred 
 ScrifDture, as it was not intended by the Holy Spirit. 
 
 " The custom of the church proves, that the use of the 
 accommodatory sense is la.wful; the church accommo- 
 dates very many things from the book of Wisdom, to the 
 blessed Virgin, and various other things to other Saints ; 
 indeecl, even Christ himself. Matt. xxv. 7. applies the words 
 of Isaiah, xxix. 13, to the Scribes and Pharisees of his own 
 time ; * this people honours me with their lips,' (although) 
 spoken to the Jews in the time of Isaiah. 
 
 " This use in honourable things for a good object has been 
 permitted, even to private individuals ; hence, the so frequent 
 use of it among the Holy Fathers, and pious preachers. 
 Nor is it doubtful, that the Holy Spirit sometimes has sug- 
 gested similar meanings .to readers, so that on this account, 
 St. Augustine calls them the meanings of Sacred Scripture. 
 
 " Yet observe, that many frequently abuse the words, or 
 sentences of Holy Scripture, when they accommodate them 
 in common discourse, or otherwise, to profane things, jests, 
 &;c. ; for, this, sanctity and the reverence due to the word of 
 ,God forbid." 
 
 To the " accommodatory" system of interpretation, when 
 properly, judiciously, and scripturally exercised, there can 
 certainly be no objection. It frequently happens that a pas- 
 sage of Scripture is peculiarly applicable to circumstances, 
 &c., different in many respects from those under which it 
 was originally given, but yet there is some great leading 
 
 * I'am obliged to coin an English word, corresponding to the Latin, 
 accommodatitius, which is a monkish fabrication. , 
 
IS4 CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 
 
 feature, which is the same in both instances, and therefore 
 the application may be correctly made to either. When- 
 ever the abstract principle, or truth, contained in the Scripture, 
 is applicable to present circumstances, there can be no reason- 
 able objection to the system of accommodation. But we must 
 protest against the accommodatory meaning in the sense 
 and latitude, in which it is employed by the Church of Rome. 
 To mention one abuse out of many ; the whole Psalter, or 
 book of Psalms, has actually been accommodated by one of 
 her Cardinals, to the worship of the Virgin Mary, by sub- 
 stituting the words Mother of God, Virgin, Lady, &c., for 
 the name of Jehovah, and otherwise corrupting the Sacred 
 Text. 
 
 The following is an extract : 
 
 " Here beginneth the Psalter of the blessed Virgin, made 
 by the Seraphical doctor, St. Bonaventure, bishop of Alban, 
 and Cardinal of the Holy Church of Rome.* 
 
 " Blessed is the man that understandeth thy name, O Vir- 
 gin Mary, thy grace shall comfort his soul. Thou shalt 
 bring forth in him the most plentiful fruit of justice, &c. 
 
 " Why do our enemies fret and imagine vaiii things 
 against us ? let thy right hand defend us, O Mother of God, 
 terribly confounding and destroying them as a sword. Come 
 unto her, all ye that labour, and are troubled, and she will 
 give rest unto your souls, &c. 
 
 " When I called to thee, thou heardest, O my lady, and 
 out of thy high throne, thou didst vouchsafe to think of me, 
 &c. Blessed be thou, O lady, for ever, and thy majesty, 
 for ever dear. 
 
 " Preserve me, O lady, for in thee have I put my trust, &c. 
 
 " Blessed be thy breasts, which, with thy deifying npilk, 
 did nourish the Saviour, &c. 
 
 " I will love thee, O lady of heaven and earth ; I will 
 call upon thy name among the nations, &c. All ye clois- 
 terers honour her, for she is your helper, and special advo- 
 cate. 
 
 * Canonized by Pope Sixtus, in 1482, and now worshipped as a 
 Saint ^ 
 
CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 135 
 
 " The wicked man said, &c. Let him depart from his 
 evil purpose ; O Mother of God, turn the countenance of 
 God towards us ; compel him to be merciful unto sinners, 
 &c. 
 
 " My heart is inditing a good matter, O lady, &c. 
 
 " Clap your hands, all ye people, &c. For she is the 
 gate of life, the door of Salvation, the reconciler of our life, 
 the hope of the penitent, the comfort of the sorrowful, the 
 blessed peace of hearts and Salvation. 
 
 " Have mercy upon me, O lady, have mercy upon me ; 
 for thou art the light, and hope of all that put their trust in 
 thee. 
 
 " The Lord said unto our lady, Sit here, my mother, on 
 my right hand, &c. 
 
 " In the passing of my soul out of this world, come and 
 meet it, O lady, and receive it, &c. Be to it a ladder to the 
 kingdom of heaven, and a right way to the paradise of God 
 &c. 
 
 " Except our lady shall build the house of our heart, the 
 building thereof shall not continue," &c., &€.* 
 
 How any creature out of hell could ever have dared to 
 utter such horrid blasphemies, is a mystery to me ! 
 
 Concerning the Obscurity of Sacred Scripture, 
 
 " Is Holy Scripture obscure? 
 
 " It is agreed against the heretics, that Holy Scripture in 
 various passages is obscure. 
 
 " It is proved from Acts, viii., where Philip asks the 
 Eunuch who was reading Isaiah, v. 30. * Thinkest thou 
 that thou understandest what thou readest ?' and he says, v. 
 31. *And how can I, unless some one show mel' also, 
 from 2 Ep. of Pet. iii. 16., where speaking of the Epistles 
 of Paul, he says: 'In which are some things hard to be 
 understood.' 
 
 " It is proved, also, from the unanimous consent of the 
 Holy Fathers : and more than that, the very dissensions of 
 heretics clearly show it ; for why, if Scripture is every- 
 where clear, as they say, do they themselves differ among 
 themselves, and assemble Synods in order to determine con- 
 
 * See Fox's Acts, and Mon. p. 185, folio. 
 
136 CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 
 
 troversies ? Why do the Lutherans understand Scripture in 
 one way, and the Calvinists in another 1 
 
 " Wherefore is the sense of Scripture often obscure ? 
 
 " In the first place, that obscurity arises partly from the 
 mysteries which are there contained, and surpass human 
 apprehension, partly from phrases peculiar to that language 
 in which the sacred books were written, partly from figura- 
 tive expressions, and partly from sentences apparently con- 
 tradictory. 
 
 " But neither were reasons wanting why it should be pro- 
 posed in an obscure manner. 
 
 " First indeed to rebuke our pride, inasmuch as from this 
 we are compelled to confess our ignorance, and to ask wis- 
 dom from God. 
 
 " Secondly. For the majesty and reverence of sacred Scrip- 
 ture ; for those things which are easily investigated for the 
 most part become contemptible. 
 
 " Thirdly. * In order that a studious mind may be both 
 more usefully exercised in investigating, and more abundantly 
 rejoiced in finding them,' says St. Augustine; for those 
 things which have been obtained by labour and in a long 
 time, are loved more, and remain more permanently. 
 
 " Fourthly. That mysteries may be hidden from the deri- 
 sion of infidels." 
 
 One of the most common devices which the church of 
 Rome has employed to hinder the circulation and study of 
 the Scriptures, is developed in this section. " The Scriptures 
 are obscure, and are not to be understood by the common 
 people." That there are some passages which are less 
 easily understood than others, is freely admitted, but the 
 texts which present any real difficulty are comparatively few 
 and far between. The argument which is based upon the 
 case of the eunuch, whom Philip found reading Isaiah, is 
 contemptible. Was it any wonder that the eunuch, whose 
 acquaintance with revelation was so slender and recent, 
 should be at a loss to understand the prophecies which 
 related to a Saviour of whom he had never heard? At 
 all events, if the Scriptures had been in an unknown tongue, 
 
CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 137 
 
 he could not have read them. In relation to the other 
 passage from 2 Peter iii. 16, we would remark : 
 
 1. The Apostle Peter does not say iv aj^, but ^v oig, not 
 in which Epistles of Paul (as Peter Dens has it), but in 
 which things (points or doctrines mentioned before), " many 
 things are hard to be understood." If the Epistles of Paul 
 had been intended, then the Greek relative would have been 
 in the feminine, as the noun 'E'KKJToXr) is feminine ; but the 
 relative is in the neuter, o»g, plainly showing that it refers to 
 the word toutwv, which immediately precedes it ; indeed, the 
 word "Epistles" is not mentioned, though Peter. is evidently 
 alluding to them in the preceding verse. 
 
 2. Whilst it is admitted that some points are in them- 
 selves hard to be understood, we distinctly affirm that all 
 things necessary to salvation are sufficiently expressed and 
 plainly revealed. 
 
 3. Those things which are at all obscure. in Paul's Epis- 
 tles, are perspicuously explained in other parts of Scripture. 
 
 4. The apostle does not say that these things are hard to 
 be understood, simply and to all men, but to the " ignorant 
 and unstable, who wrest other Scriptures to their own de- 
 struction ;" and, by the way, the church of Rome is paying 
 a poor compliment to her children by citing this text as a 
 reason for withholding the Scriptures from them. 
 
 5. And even supposing that the Scriptures are hard to be 
 understood, and that they are wrested by some to their own 
 damnation, how does it follow that they are no guide at all, 
 or even an uncertain one ? 
 
 May it not just as well be said that Christ was not an in- 
 fallible guide, because he spoke parables, and many of his 
 words were wrested by the Jews to their destruction ? For 
 instance, when he spoke of destroying the temple, and 
 building it in three days, John ii. 19. — or when he said he 
 was the Son of God, Matt. xxvi. 64, 65, upon which they 
 12 
 
138 CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 
 
 cried out he had spoken blasphemy, and they needed no 
 farther witness, &c. 
 
 Concerning the reading of Sacred Scripture. 
 
 " Is the reading of Sacred Scripture necessary or com- 
 nianded to all ? 
 
 " Ans. That it is not necessary or commanded to all, is 
 plain from the practice and doctrine of the universal church ; 
 for which reason, in the Bull unigenitus, the 70th proposi- 
 tion concerning this thing was condemned : ' It is useful and 
 necessary at every time and place, and for every kind of 
 people to study and learn the spirit, piety, and mysteries of 
 Sacred Scriptures.' To this add the 80th, 81st, 82d, 83d, 
 84th, and 85th propositions, condemned in the same bull. 
 
 *' It is farther proved,. thus : it is the duty of some in the 
 church to teach ; it is the duty of others to seek knowledge 
 of the law from the mouth of the priests, almost in the same 
 way as, in civil affairs, it is not the duty of all to investigate 
 the laws, adjudge controversies, &c. 
 
 "This is confirmed: because St. Augustine, Book 1, 
 concerning Christian doctrine, chap, xxxix. reports that 
 certain churches, during two centuries and more, subsisted 
 without the Scriptures; add to this that many of the faithful 
 do not know how to read, to whom it is not convenient either, 
 to have any one who might read before them. 
 
 *' Besides, the Sacred Scripture was not read in the church, 
 except in Latin, Hebrew, or Greek, until the fourth century, 
 and in Spain, only in Latin, until the sixth century ; and in 
 England until the seventh century, as Bede attests ; and 
 Harney shows that our ancestors had no Bibles rendered 
 into the vulgar tongue, in the first eight centuries after 
 Christianity was planted here. 
 
 " But if the fathers had judged the promiscuous reading 
 of Sacred Scripture to be necessary, as Quesnel and the 
 other heretics boisterously assert, undoubtedly they would 
 have translated it into the vulgar tongue. 
 
 " But the study of Sacred Scripture is, by reason of their 
 office and station, necessary to the priests and rulers of the 
 church, on whom the labour of teaching and arguing is in- 
 cumbent, according to that which is said. Matt. ii. 7. ' The 
 lips of the priest shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek 
 
CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 139 
 
 the law at his mouth ;' and therefore John Henry, Archbishop 
 of Mechlin, in his decree of March 12, 1762, justly resolved 
 that no one should hereafter be admitted by him to sacred 
 orders, unless he has diligently perused the principal books 
 of Sacred Scripture. 
 
 " Is the reading of Sacred Scripture permitted to all per- 
 sons? 
 
 "Aw5. The church does not forbid by any decree, the 
 reading of Sacred Scripture, even to the laity, in the Hebrew, 
 Greek, or Latin language. 
 
 " Of course, however, this must be abstained from, if this 
 reading, through defect of capacity, or disposition of the 
 mind, would be of bad tendency ; as it was in regard to 
 those of whom Peter speaks, 2 Ep. iii. 16., ' which the un- 
 learned and unstable wrest to their own destruction.' 
 
 " The church does not absolutely forbid the reading of 
 Sacred Scripture in the vernacular tongue to the laity, or to 
 persons of any condition, whatsoever ; but it does not per- 
 mit it except with great caution. 
 
 " This discipline of the church which had already been 
 received by custom in particular churches, was established 
 for the whole church, by the fourth rule of the index, 
 towards the close of the Council of Trent, in these words : 
 
 "'As it is manifest by experience, if Holy Bibles in the 
 vulgar tongue are everywhere indiscriminately permitted, 
 more injury than advantage would accrue, on account of the 
 temerity of people, let it abide in this point by the judgment 
 of the bishop, or inquisitor : that with the advice of the 
 priest, or confessor, the reading of Bibles in the vulgar 
 tongue, translated by Catholic authors, may be conceded to 
 those, who they know can derive no injury, but an increase 
 of faith and piety from such reading: which permission 
 they must have in writing. But whoever shall presume 
 without such permission to have, or to read them, cannot 
 obtain absolution of his sins, unless the Bibles be first re- 
 turned to the ordinary. But regulars may neither pur- 
 chase, nor read them, except by permission obtained from 
 their Prelates.' 
 
 " Moreover, if you except certain points, such as (those) 
 are relating to the obtaining of permission in writing, the 
 returning of the Bibles previous to absolution, and to be 
 
140 CONCERNING RULES OF. FAITH. 
 
 made to the ordinary, the observance of this law is strenu- 
 ously urged by the bishops of Catholic Belgium ; as may 
 be seen in Harney: and as for this Diocese, See Synod. 
 Dioeces. ii. lit. i. ch. 8, &c. 
 
 " IndeedJ according to Steyaert, this law has been receiv- 
 ed, and hitherto kept (with some variation, on account of the 
 prevailing spirit of some regions) in by far the greatest part 
 of the Catholic world ; indeed, in the whole purely Catholic 
 world : more indulgence has been granted, only 
 
 WHEN IT WAS NECESSARY TO LIVE AMONG HERETICS. 
 
 " Observe that according to the rule stated (above), the 
 power of granting permission to read the Sacred Scripture 
 in the vernacular tongue, belongs to the bishop, or inquisi- 
 tor, not to the priest, or confessors, unless this power has 
 been conceded to them. 
 
 " The prohibition of keeping, and reading vernacular 
 Bibles, includes the parts of the Old, as well as of the New 
 Testament, which custom does not except ; but some of the 
 psalms are excepted by custom, the canticles, and the pas- 
 sion of the Lord inserted in prayer books. The custom has 
 likewise obtained in many places, that the epistles, and gos- 
 pels, may be read, which are to be sung during the year in 
 the mass; also, the history of the Old and New Testa- 
 ment. 
 
 " Sylvius teaches in various explanations, under the word 
 Bibles, that pastors, preachers, and others, who are pre- 
 paring for the office of priest, or preacher, may make use 
 of Scripture in the vernacular language : because this per- 
 mission has been conceded to them, by the very fact that 
 they are designed for such office ; and certainly it has been 
 conceded by the Council of Trent, sess. xxii. ch. 8., where 
 it enjoins that the Sacred Oracles be frequently explained in 
 the vernacular tongue, during the solemnities of the mass, 
 or the celebration of the divine offices. This explanation 
 of Sylvius, common custom approves and confirms. 
 
 " He adds, however, that it is not equally agreed, con- 
 cerning priests, who are preparing for the office, either of 
 priest or preacher, and much less concerning laymen, well 
 skilled in Latin. 
 
 " The Quesnellites object : this prohibition is unjust ; bo- 
 cause a thing, good and useful in itself, is not a matter of 
 
CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 141 
 
 prohibition; but Sacred Scripture is a thing in itself good 
 and useful, to be taught, argued, &c., as is said, 2 Tim. iii., 
 therefore, &c. 
 
 "I answer by distinguishing the assumption of the proof; 
 I admit the assertion, that a thi-ng good and useful in itself 
 cannot be matter of prohibition on its own account ; but I 
 deny the assertion, that it cannot be matter of prohibition 
 through contingency, on account of circumstances, persons, 
 effects, &c. For instance; communion under both kinds, 
 although in itself it is excellent, is still forbidden to the 
 laity : thus, also, articles of food in themselves good are 
 wisely denied to those, to whom by reason of infirmity, or 
 weakness, they would be hurtful, or dangerous. 
 
 " But you will reply : although some persons may abuse 
 food, or drink, as for instance, wine, the use of these things 
 cannot therefore be forbidden, therefore, &c. 
 
 " 1. A?is. I admit the antecedent, when understood of a 
 law prohibiting universally; because they are of universally 
 necessary use, or simply useful : although even in these 
 things, in order to obviate the abuse, a certain moderation 
 in the use may be prescribed. 
 
 " 2. Ans. 1 deny the inference : there is a disparity, be- 
 cause Sacred Scripture has not been ordained, that any one 
 may of himself make use of it like meat and drink ; inas- 
 much as the use of these things cannot be supplied from 
 another source, whilst the reading of Sacred Scripture is 
 supplied more usefully, and without danger of detriment,, 
 through the instruction of pastors, &c., from whose mouth 
 the people ought to seek the law of God. Whence, observe, 
 that Sacred Scripture is a Testament, pertaining, indeed, to 
 all, as to the matter, but not as to the reading of the Testa- 
 ment. 
 
 " 3. Ans. It has already been stated above, that the read- 
 ing of Sacred Scripture is not simply prohibited ; but in 
 taking away the abuse the church moderates its use, leaving 
 it to the discretion of superiors, (which cannot thus be done 
 in the use of wine), who can judge to whom this use or 
 reading may be good and useful. 
 
 " Obj. 11. St. Chrysostom, Hom. 9, Epist. to Col., speaks 
 thus : " Hear, I beseech you, ye laymen ; all of you get 
 Bibles for yourselves, as medicine for the soul ;' and Hom. 
 12* 
 
142 CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 
 
 3, concerning Lazarus, he says, the reading of Sacred 
 Scripture is necessary to salvation. Likewise, St. Jeronne 
 exhorted women also, Paula, Eustochia, &c., to read the 
 Scripture; therefore. Sacred Scripture is to be read by all, 
 even in the vernacular tongue. 
 
 " I answer by denying the inference : in the first place, 
 those Fathers do not say that Sacred Scripture is to be read 
 in a language that is not sacred ; but those wonnen to whonn 
 St. Jerome speaks, were well versed in the Latin tongue. 
 
 " It must be said that in this point the discipline of the 
 church has been changed, just as communion under both 
 kinds and daily communion have been changed. For formerly 
 the faithful, more submissive to their pastors, humbly and 
 faithfully derived the sense of Scripture from them without 
 danger of perverse translations ; but now, through the ex- 
 ample of the heretics, the lust of dissenting from the pastors 
 has arisen ; and it is manifest from experience that by the 
 
 PROMISCUOUS READING OF THE SaCRED ScRIPTURE, MEN 
 ARE MADE MORE PROUD, MORE DISCONTENTED, AND UNI- 
 VERSALLY MORE CONCEITED. As for that which is objected 
 out of the Holy Fathers, — when they wished to inculcate 
 any thing as proper and useful in their own time, they occa- 
 sionally used words, by which not only advantage, but also 
 absolute necessity at first appearance was indicated ,* but that 
 they did not think the reading of the Holy Scripture to be 
 necessary for all, is sufficiently gathered from other passages : 
 and thus St. Chrysostom himself, Hom. 21. on Genesis, says, 
 that the Scriptures are not to be searched by all ; and St. 
 Jerome, writing to Paulinus, complains, that all men are 
 presuming to read and interpret Sacred Scripture." 
 
 We have sometimes known the advocates of Romanism 
 boldly deny that their church forbids the laity to read the 
 Scriptures ; and in the foregoing section it will be observed 
 that notwithstanding all the special pleading in favour of 
 withholding the word of God from the common people, it is 
 expressly stated, " The church does not absolutely forbid the 
 reading of Sacred Scripture in the vernacular tongue to the 
 laity, or to persons of any condition whatsoever, but it does 
 not permit it except with great caution." The decree of the 
 
CONCEI^NING RULES OF FAITH. 143 
 
 Council of Trent, an infallible oecumenical con^vention of 
 Romish doctors and bishops, is very explicit in its conditional 
 prohibitions, but even there it is not absolute, as the Bishop or 
 Inquisitor may permit the laity to read the Bible whenever 
 it is likely to do no harm. It is perfectly manifest, however, 
 that the Romish Church is the deadly enemy of the general 
 distribution and investigation of the Scriptures. Her priests 
 hate the Bible ; and we are not surprised at the rancour with 
 which they assail the Protestant's Rule of Faith. By their 
 own confession. Popery cannot be sustained by Scripture ; 
 they must prop up their system by the pillars of tradition, 
 or it crumbles into dust. But the golden age of Romanism 
 is for ever gone! Thanks to the "example of heretics," 
 there are many in the communion of the Romish Church 
 who claim the right of searching the Scriptures for them- 
 selves. Those were palmy days " when the faithful, more 
 submissive to their pastors, humbly and faithfully derived 
 the sense of Scripture from them ;" then, like dutiful cliildren, 
 the faithful received all as gospel which the Holy Fathers 
 told them, and piously asked forgiveness and did penance 
 whenever their ghostly counsellors detected them exercising 
 themselves in things that were beyond the apprehension of 
 the laity 1 Oh ! how the bowels of Holy Mother yearn for 
 such a revival of religion; how the Holy Fathers sigh, 
 •when they are compelled to afford more license to the circu- 
 lation of the Sacred Scriptures than is consistent with the 
 dignity and true prosperity of Holy Church ! And yet, far 
 be it from those holy men absolutely to forbid the laity to 
 read the Bible. Any one of the faithful may possess a copy 
 of the Scriptures in Latin or Greek, and he may have the 
 Old Testament in Hebrew, too, provided he does not under- 
 stand those languages, because then the word of God can do 
 him no harm ; it will not make him proud, or discon- 
 tented, or CONCEITED, if hc cannot discern one word from 
 another, but it will tend rather to augment his veneration 
 
144 CONCERNING KULES OF FAITH. 
 
 for the sacred mysteries of Scripture. The faithful who 
 have never learned their alphabet, are also at liberty to pur- 
 chase Bibles in the vernacular tongue, especially such as the 
 priest or bishop has blessed ; and no doubt they will find 
 them quite as efficacious in driving away the devil as a pot 
 of " holy water." 
 
 But now, in all seriousness, what are we to think of the 
 Church whose priests are taught that the promiscuous read- 
 ing of the Scriptures renders men universally more proud, 
 DISCONTENTED, and CONCEITED ! That it makes them dis- 
 contented with popery, we can readily believe ; that it causes 
 them to turn even with contempt from its absurdities, we 
 do not doubt ; and this very fact furnishes us with one 
 of our strongest arguments. Popery can not stand before 
 the light of Scripture; it shrinks from God's testimony 
 abashed and confounded. The priests well know that the 
 word of God is their most uncompromising enemy. It spe- 
 cifies the corruptions of their church by the voice of pro- 
 phecy ; it reprobates many of her peculiar dogmas by 
 name, and brands her with the marks of apostasy ! Its 
 very silence condemns her forms and ceremonies, by proving 
 that they are mere human inventions ; whilst the purity, 
 peace, and love, which beam on every page of the sacred 
 volume, rebuke the lewdness and cruelty for which she is 
 notorious. But it is a foul slander on the sacred oracles to 
 assert that their perusal can be pernicious. If the theology 
 of Rome is true, then the inference is irresistible, that the Bible 
 must be a bad book. If it uniformly produces injurious 
 results in exact proportion to the extent of its circulation, 
 we repeat, it must be a bad book, and it is blasphemy to 
 assert that God is its author. He cannot be the author of evil. 
 
 The opposition of the Church of Rome to the Scriptures, 
 proves that her cause is desperate. " Every one that doeth 
 evil, hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his. 
 deeds should be reproved." But without farther introduc- 
 
CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 145 
 
 tion, let us briefly state, why the Protestant Churches believe 
 it proper, that the Scriptures should be translated into every 
 language on earth, for the edification of all people. 
 
 1. If all Christians are under obligation, according to their 
 capacity, to " search the Scriptures," and by them to test 
 the doctrines of their teachers, then the Scriptures ought 
 necessarily to be translated into the vulgar tongues, that the 
 people may be enabled to do this. But the first is the direct 
 command of God. When the Jews would not believe Christ, 
 he bade them, " search the Scriptures," &c. John v. 39. 
 And in Acts, xvii. 11., the Bereans are commended in these 
 words : " these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, 
 in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, 
 and searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were 
 so." Therefore it is right that the Scriptures should be 
 translated into the vulgar tongue. 
 
 2. Jehovah himself, when he gave a law to the Jews, pro- 
 mulgated it in their common language ; and both the Old 
 and New Testaments were delivered in tongues that were 
 most familiar in those times, respectively, to the church ; 
 therefore, from this fact, it is also evident that for the gen- 
 eral use and benefit of the common people, the Scriptures 
 may and ought to be translated into the languages, which 
 are most familiar to them. 
 
 3. If the Holy Scriptures were lawfully and necessarily 
 translated into Latin, for the use of the Latin Church, then 
 by parity of reason they ought to be translated into other 
 tongues ; unless it can be proved that the Scriptures were 
 more necessary to the Latin, than to other churches. Now 
 that they were thus lawfully translated into Latin for the 
 purposes stated, our adversaries will not deny. Therefore 
 it is right that they should be rendered into every other lan- 
 guage. 
 
 4. If we lock up the Scripture in unknown languages, we 
 frustrate the very end for which God designed it. He has 
 
146 CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 
 
 given it to us as a revelation of his will, that by hearing 
 reading, understanding, believing, and obeying it, we may 
 be saved. " For whatsoever things were written aforetime 
 were written for our learning ; that we through patience and 
 comfort of the Scriptures might have hope.'* Rom. xv. 4. 
 But how are we to learn these things and thus through 
 patience and comfort of the Scripture have hope,' unless 
 they are translated into a language which we. understand? 
 
 5. If it be wanton cruelty to deny any one bodily food 
 and sustenance, it is still worse to deprive people of the food 
 and nourishment of their souls. Now as the Holy Spirit 
 frequently declares the Scripture to be the ' word of life,' 
 and compares it to "milk," and "strong meat," the ora- 
 cles of God should be translated into a language, which the 
 unlearned may understand, because otherwise they are de- 
 prived of this spiritual nourishment. The Romish Church 
 is.guiltyof the utmost cruelty and sacrilege in thus starving 
 the souls, whom she professes to feed. 
 
 6. It is wicked to deprive the Christian Soldier of his 
 spiritual weapons ; he needs them at all times and every- 
 where. But the Holy Scriptures are part, of the whole 
 armour of God. " Take the sword of the Spirit, which is 
 the word of God." Eph. vi. 17. " For the word of God is 
 quick and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, 
 &c." Heb. iv. 12. Now common Christians are deprived 
 of this great spiritual weapon, if the word of God is given 
 to them in a language which they cannot understand. 
 
 7. The Scriptures are compared to a candle or burning 
 torch, set up by God for the very purpose of enlightening 
 all men in the way of truth and salvation ; hence David 
 says, " thy word is a light to my feet, and a lamp to my 
 path." But in order that every believer may be enabled by 
 it to direct his steps, it must be translated, otherwise this 
 lighted candle is put under a bushel. 
 
 Besides all this, the testimony of the Primitive Church is 
 
CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 147 
 
 On our side in this controversy. This, Peter Dens and the 
 priests both know and feel ; hence their attempts to explain 
 away the plain and unequivocal language of the fathers. 
 Origen of the third century, though his father was a lay- 
 man, knew the Scriptures from a child. We learn from 
 Eusebius (Eccles. Hist. Bk. vi. ch. 2.) that his father Leo- 
 nidas daily assigned him a portion of them, which he was 
 to commit to memory ; and he must have been a child at 
 this time, for he was only seventeen years old, when his 
 father suffered martyrdom. Origen himself thus writes: 
 ** We beseech you not to content yourselves to hear the 
 word of God when read in the church, but to apply your- 
 selves to it at home, and to meditate upon it day and night. 
 Christ has commanded us to meditate in the law of the 
 Lord, when we walk by the way, and when we sit in our 
 houses, when we lie down, and when we rise up."* The 
 sentence from Chrysostom, is only half quoted by Peter 
 Dens ,* let us help him to the latter clause : " Hear, I be- 
 seech you, O all ye laymen, provide yourselves with the 
 Bible, that medicine of the soul ; or if you have nothing 
 
 ELSE, YET AT LEAST GET THE NeW TESTAMENT, THE 
 
 Apostles, the Acts, and the GospELs.f Chrysostom 
 says also, " the reading of the Scriptures is more necessary 
 for laymen than for monks.":}: Again he says, " the people 
 ought as soon as they come home from the church, to turn 
 over the holy books, and to call their wives and children 
 together to the conference of those things which are said."§ 
 Jerome, we are told on the testimony of Hosius a Romish 
 author, translated the Scriptures into the Dalmatian, as well 
 as the Latin tongue. Socrates, the Ecclesiastical Historian, 
 Bk. iv. chap. 33. informs us, that Ulphila, a Gothish bishop, 
 present at the Nicene Council, translated the Bible into the 
 native language of his country. Now what are we to think 
 
 * Horn. 9, in Levit. t Horn. 9, in Col. 
 
 t Cora. Matt. horn. 2. § Com. Matt. horn. 5. 
 
148 CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 
 
 of the honesty of the men who tell us that the primitive 
 fathers reprobated the reading of the Scriptures by the com- 
 mon people ! It is well known also, that the Old Testament 
 was translated from Hebrew into Greek, before our Saviour's 
 time. This was done for the special benefit of the Alex- 
 andrian Jews, who had forgotten their own language. This 
 translation is familiarly known by the name of the Septua- 
 gint, and was used by Christ and his apostles, being then 
 most extensively circulated. 
 
 In conclusion, we will notice an objection which is not 
 unfrequently made, and upon which our adversaries in this 
 controversy have laid great stress. They ask us : " If the 
 main reason for translating the Bible is that the people may 
 understand it, how comes it that there is so great a difference 
 of opinion among Protestant Ministers and people, and 
 whence the necessity of these numerous comments and ex- 
 positions, which in many respects vary so much one from 
 another ?" 
 
 "We answer: Admitting that the common people do not 
 understand all things contained in the Scripture, they may 
 and do understand many. The Bible is a spiritual store- 
 house, in which there is food accommodated to all ages and 
 constitutions. Here we have " milk for babes," and " strong 
 meat for them that are of full age." Heb. v. 13. 
 
 The simplicity of many precious Scriptures condescends 
 to our weakness ; the difficulty of other passages awakens 
 industry and research. Here we have perspicuity to regu- 
 late our duty, and obscurity to teach us humility. We bless 
 the goodness of God in its clear discoveries, and we adore 
 his wisdom in its veiled mysteries. The plain instructions 
 of God's blessed word, we will with the help of divine grace 
 improve to our salvation, and as for " the things that am 
 hard to be understood," if we cannot unfold them to our 
 own satisfaction and the edification of others, we will at 
 least endeavour by God's grace not to wrest them to our 
 
con(5erning rules of faith. 149 
 
 own destruction. Whilst we freely admit that there are 
 doctrines of Scripture, which are variously stated and un- 
 derstood by different denominations of the church of Christ, 
 we would remind the advocates of popery that in the essen- 
 tial doctrines of revelation, we are agreed ; the truths, which 
 involve salvation we hold in unity of faith ; and as to minor 
 points we can agree to differ. 
 
 In reading the Scriptures, we wish to be governed by the 
 following rules, which we respectfully commend to the atten- 
 tion of all men, whether Protestants or Papists. 
 
 1. We would read prayerfully. Christ's precept and 
 promise enjoin this duty. *' Ask and it shall be given you," 
 &c. . And again, James (i. 5.) says, If any man lack wis- 
 dom, let him ask of God, &c. 
 
 2. We would submit our understandings to the wisdom 
 of God, and subject all our thoughts to the obedience of 
 Christ. " If any man seemeth to be wise in this world, let 
 him become a fool that he may be wise ; for the wisdom of 
 the world is foolishness with God." 1 Cor. iii. 18, 19 ; and 
 also. Matt. xi. 25. 
 
 3. We would lay aside all prejudice, self-interest or 
 undue prepossession in favour of any system, or the notions 
 of any man, or set of nien. We would beware of this 
 leaven of the Pharisees. Matt, xvi. 6. 12. 
 
 4. We would search the Scriptures with faith, and in 
 the exercise of true repentance for all our sins ; . knowing 
 that in the impenitent and profane, the Spirit of Christ will 
 not dwell. 2 Tim. iii, 7. " They are ever learning, and 
 never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." 
 
 5. We would be filed with love for the truth, and a sin- 
 cere desire to know and embrace it, not through mere for- 
 mality or custom, remembering Paul's words, " because they 
 received not the knowledge of the truth, God shall send 
 them strong delusions that they should believe a lie." 
 
 6. We would take up our Bibles with a sincere desire not 
 
 13 
 
150 CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 
 
 only to know, hut also to do the will of God ; never for- 
 getting that the great end of Scripture is practical ; teaching 
 us, that " denying all ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should 
 live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world." 
 Tit. ii. 12. 
 
 Certain questions concerning Sacred Scripture. 
 (No. 65.) 
 
 " Have any sacred books been lost ? 
 
 " Ans. Yes, this is plain from the Bible itself in which 
 various books are cited, which are unknown to us, &c., &c. 
 
 " Are any autographs extant to this time, or primitive and 
 original manuscripts of Sacred Scripture ? 
 
 ^^ Ans. No. Nor is this necessary, as the copies of tran- 
 scripts approved by the church are of the same authority 
 and use ; without whose approbation not even the original 
 manuscripts would have this authority as to us, according to 
 that (declaration) of St. Augustine ; * I would not believe the 
 Gospel, unless the authority of the church constrained me.' 
 
 " How great is the authority of the edition of the Latin 
 vulgate 1 
 
 " Ans. It is summary and infallible, because by a decree 
 of the Council of Trent, it has been approved and declared 
 authentic ; and so that it is a certain and infallible rule of 
 our faith, because in it nothing is contained contrary to faith 
 or morals, nor any false or erroneous sentiment. 
 
 ** With this it is still consistent, say Bukentop and others, 
 that our vulgate is not so absolute in all its parts, but that 
 something in it might have been expressed more significantly ; 
 some more clearly translated, some rendered into better 
 Latin, and some placed in more correct order : therefore no 
 one can deny but that reference may usefully be made to 
 the Hebrew or Greek text, (although these are not free from 
 errors peculiar to them,) &c. &c. 
 
 "Finally, in opposition to heretics, and for the under- 
 standing of Sacred Scripture, observe the following things : 
 
 " 1. Sacred Scripture is not authentic for us, except through 
 tradition and the teaching of the Church. 
 
 "2. Sacred Scripture is to be received in that sense in 
 which the Church receives it. 
 
CONCERNING RULES OF FAITH. 151 
 
 " 3. The legitimate sense of Scripture is known to us 
 through tradition. 
 
 " 4. From this rule it follows that the true sense of Scrip- 
 ture must be borrowed from the doctrine of the Holy 
 Fathers ; for which reason, observe the decree of the Council 
 of Trent, sess. 4, by which it resolved that no one may dare 
 to interpret Sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which 
 Holy Mother Church held and holds, or contrary to the 
 unanimous consent of the Fathers, especially in matters of 
 faith or customs. 
 
 " 5. Sacred Scripture is to be understood in the obvious and 
 proper meaning of the words ; unless something interposes 
 to the contrary, by which another legitimate sense of Scrip- 
 ture may be proved. 
 
 " Finally, by means of the passages of Scripture which 
 are more clear, others which are less clear, ought to be elu- 
 cidated. The heretics offend against this rule, for whom it 
 is a common thing to catch up some obscure passages, to 
 which they misapply all others, even the clearest texts." 
 
 What the papists mean by the unanimous consent of the 
 Fathers, is not easy to determine. One thing is certain, 
 there is as much discrepancy between the Fathers as there 
 is among any other writers on Christian faith and morals. 
 We can defy all the priests in creation to sustain any one 
 dogma which is peculiar to the Romish Church, by the 
 " unanimous testimony of the Fathers." Notwithstanding 
 all the bare-faced interpolations by which many editions of 
 the primitive Christian writings have been corrupted, they 
 are still unable to make out their case. 
 
152 CONCERNING TRADITIONS. 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 f Concerning Traditions and their Divisions. (66.) 
 
 " What is tradition ? 
 
 " j4w5. Generally understood, it is nothing else than un- 
 written doctrine : not as though it could never be found 
 written ; but because it has not been written by its author, 
 nor dictated by him that it might be written. 
 
 " Tradition, therefore, as it is taken theologically, may be 
 defined : ' a doctrine pertaining to religion, which is commu- 
 nicated orally by its author, and is transmitted to posterity, 
 whether it be afterwards written by any one or not.' 
 
 " How is tradition divided ? 
 
 " Ans. 1. On account of its origin or author, into divine, 
 apostolic, and ecclesiastical tradition. 
 
 " 2. On account of its matter, into dogmatic, ritual, 
 and moral tradition. 
 
 "3. On account of its duration, into perpetual and tem- 
 poral. 
 
 " 4. On account of its place, into universal and par- 
 ticular. 
 
 " What tradition is called divine ? 
 
 " Ans. It is the unwritten word of God, or it is a truth 
 divinely revealed to the Church, and transmitted by the 
 Fathers to the latest posterity without the writing of a canon- 
 ical author. Examples of divine tradition are : that there 
 are seven sacraments, neither more nor less ; that there 
 are four gospels ; that the Mother of God always remained 
 a virgin ; that infants are to be baptized ; and various other 
 things, which relate to the substance and forms of the sacra- 
 ments. 
 
 " Apostolic tradition is that which was instituted by the 
 apostles as the pastors of the Church ; such is the observ- 
 ance of the Lord's day, the forty days' fast, and various 
 riles of the mass and sacraments. 
 
 " That is called ecclesiastical tradition, which was intro- 
 duced by the superiors of the Church or by Christian people 
 after the times of the apostles ; such are the observance of 
 
CONCERNING TRADITIONS. lH 
 
 festivals, abstinence from eggs and milk-diet on certain 
 days, &c. 
 
 " Yet observe, that these terms, divine, apostolic, eccle- 
 siastical tradition, are sometimes so confounded that some- 
 thing is said to be of apostolic or ecclesiastic tradition, 
 which is of divine tradition, and vice versa. 
 
 " What tradition is called dogmatic ? 
 
 " It is that which treats concerning the doctrines of the 
 faith ; as is .that by^ which the existence of Scripture is 
 proved, and that it is the word of God, &c. 
 
 *' Ritual is concerning sacred rites : such is the doctrine 
 of the ceremonies which are observed in the sacrifice of the 
 mass, the administration of the sacraments, &c. 
 
 " Moral pertains to customs ; as that on certain days 
 fasts are to be observed, that the festival of Easter is to be 
 celebrated, &c. 
 
 *' Perpetual tradition is that which is instituted that it may 
 always be kept ; such are the divine traditions. 
 
 " Temporal is that which is instituted for a certain time: 
 as abstinence from blood and things strangled was at the 
 beginning of the Church. 
 
 *' Universal tradition is that which is proposed for obser- 
 vation to the whole Church : as the observance of the Lord's 
 day. 
 
 " Particular is that which was appointed for one or more 
 particular churches : thus, in the time of St. Augustine, a 
 fast was observed at Rome on the Sabbath, but not at Milan. 
 
 *' How great is the authority of tradition ? 
 
 *' Divine tradition has equal authority with Holy Scrip- 
 ture ; for both are truly -the word of God. There is only 
 this difference, that as for Holy Scripture, the creed of the 
 church is more plain to us ; from the circumstance that it 
 has fixed the catalogue of canonical books, and has ap- 
 proved the edition of the vulgate as authentic ; but the 
 church has not framed a catalogue of divine traditions, but 
 sets forth, sometimes one, sometimes another, as occasion 
 demands. 
 
 " Apostolic tradition has the same authority, which the 
 decrees of the apostolic institution have. 
 
 " Ecclesiastical tradition is of the same authority as the 
 ecclesiastical laws and constitutions : and hence the Pope 
 13* 
 
154 CONCERNING TRADITIONS. 
 
 may change both an apostolic and an ecclesiastical (tradi- 
 tion.) 
 
 " Is tradition a rule of faith, and which (tradition is a 
 rule?) 
 
 " Ans. Merely apostolic or ecclesiastical tradition is not 
 a rule of faith ; because neither has been divinely revealed ; 
 but divine tradition is truly a rule of faith, as it is the word 
 of God, not less than Holy Scripture. We will especially 
 establish this tradition, as the heretics assail it chiefly." 
 
 Concerning the existence and necessity of Traditions. (67.) 
 
 " Are divine traditions to be admitted besides Sacred Scrip- 
 ture? 
 
 " Ans. Our heretics say no, principally on this ground, 
 that all truths of the faith are contained in Sacred Scripture ; 
 against this error, the Catholic faith teaches, that divine tra- 
 ditions are to be admitted in the new law, as the Council of 
 Trent has decided, Sess. 4. 
 
 " The existence and necessity of the same are proved, 1. 
 from 2 Thess. ii. 14, where the apostle says: 'hold the 
 traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by 
 our epistle ;' i. e. whether in word, or writing. 
 
 " Hither tends also that which the apostle writes, 2 Tim. 
 i. 13 ; ' hold the form of sound words, which thou hast heard 
 from me in faith, and in the love which is in Jesus Christ,' 
 and ch. iii. 14. ' Continue thou in the things which thou 
 hast learned, and which have been committed to thee ; know- 
 ing of whom thou hast learned.' God refers also to tradi- 
 tion, Deut. xxxii. 7. ' Ask thy father and he will declare to 
 thee ; thy elders and they will tejl thee.' Besides, John 
 says, that not all the things which Christ taught, were writ- 
 ten, ch. xxi. 25. ' But there are also many other things 
 which Jesus did; which if they were written every one, the 
 world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books 
 that should be written.' Very many things also, which he 
 taught the apostles during the 40 days after the resurrection 
 have come down to us through tradition. Add to this the 
 unanimous consent of the Holy Fathers. 
 
 2. It is proved (thus.) Our heretics assert that they be- 
 lieve many things which are no where found in Scripture ; 
 for instance ; the virginity of the divine Virgin, even after 
 
CONCERNING TRADITIONS. 155 
 
 the birth (of Christ) ; that there are four gospels ; that bap- 
 tism Jl^plied to infants is valid, &c. 
 
 3. " It is proved from the necessity of tradition : for with- 
 out divine tradition it cannot be known what books are 
 Sacred Scripture; why the gospel of Matthew should rather 
 be received than that of Bartholomew ; what is the meaning 
 of Scripture, where there is no other means of discerning 
 those things, at least no ordinary one: although God might 
 show these things in an extraordinary way, as for instance, 
 by a miracle ; but then the course of tradition supplies the 
 (place of a) miracle. 
 
 " Hexce observe there is more need of divine 
 TRADITION THAN OF Sacred Scripture, as Scfipture can- 
 not be known without tradition. 
 
 " The heretics object. One divine tradition can be known 
 without the other ; therefore Sacred Scripture can be known 
 without divine tradition. 
 
 " The inference is plain ; just as tradition is the word of 
 God orally delivered, so Scripture is the written word of 
 God : but the word of God orally delivered may be known 
 without any other divine tradition, therefore by parity of 
 reasoning the written word of God may be thus known. 
 
 " A?is. I deny both the inference and the parity ; there is 
 a disparity, because divine tradition is a living witness, and 
 Scripture is a dead witness, which therefore does not prove 
 itself. 
 
 *' For this reason, it is to be observed that divine tradition 
 must be considered according to its own origin ; but the 
 origin of divine tradition is from the fact that God has re- 
 vealed some truth to the church by means of speech ; now 
 oral address proves itself: for there is no need when any 
 one speaks that he should also affirm that he is speaking : 
 and thus the church can propose to us one divine tradition 
 without any ulterior one. But the church receives Scripture, 
 not by means of oral communication and speech, but by 
 means of an instrument written by the sacred penman, who 
 might even be ignorant that he was writing the word of 
 God ; hence the church could not know that other Scripture 
 had been dictated by God, unless God should further prove 
 by this revelation that this Scripture had been dictated by 
 God ; and this ulterior revelation is called divine tradition. 
 
15f> CONCERNING TRADITIONS. 
 
 " You will reply : but the church without tradition can 
 define what is Sacred Scripture. The supposition is proved ; 
 the church is infallible, therefore, &c. 
 
 *' Ans. I deny this supposition : the church is indeed in- 
 fallible in definitions of faith and customs ; but in order that 
 she may define she ought not to proceed in a blind way, but 
 to have sufficient ground for her definition ; but the church 
 has not any other sufficient ground by which she may dis- 
 cern Sacred Scripture from that which is not sacred, than 
 divine tradition, therefore, &;c. 
 
 " Although some divine traditions may have existed, yet 
 they could not be preserved pure and entire to this time; 
 because that which passes from ear to ear is easily altered 
 and lost : but tradition passes from ear to ear, therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. I admit the assertion, that what passes from ear to 
 ear is easily altered, if there are no causes assisting in its 
 preservation ; but if there are such causes, I deny the asser- 
 tion ; but these causes are divine providence, which rules 
 and governs the Church, the writings of the ancients, the 
 continuous practice of the faithful ; add to this, that in almost 
 all ages new heresies arise, which God wonderfully employs 
 for the preservation of the doctrine of the Church against 
 them. Learned men also are always raised up by God, 
 who investigate and commend to posterity the doctrine of 
 the Church and ancient traditions." 
 
 CONCERNING THE PRINCIPAL RULES OF TRADITION. 
 
 1. Rules for distinguishing Traditions. 
 
 " Are there any special rules for ascertaining traditions ? 
 
 " Yes ; and the following are usually assigned : 
 
 "1. If the whole Church embraces any thing as a dogma 
 of faith or customs, has approved by practice something 
 which no one but God alone could institute, and which is not 
 found in Scripture, it must needs be a divine tradition ; thus, 
 for instance, we know that the baptism of infants is valid, 
 and that confirmation and ordination cannot be repeated, &c. 
 
 " 2. If any truth not contained in Scripture, has been re- 
 ceived in the Church, and the contrary doctrine to it has 
 been condemned as heretical, it is a divine tradition : such is 
 the perpetual virginity of the Mother of God. 
 
CONCERNING TRADITIONS. 157 
 
 " 3. Whatever the unanimous consent of the Holy Fathers 
 and doctors declares the Church to have received from the 
 apostles, has certainly been orally delivered by them. 
 
 " 4. ' Whatever the universal Church holds, and which 
 is found to have been appointed neither in councils nor else- 
 where, but has always been retained, we most certainly be- 
 lieve to have been handed down by apostolic authority,' says 
 St. Augustine, book 4. against the Donatists. 
 
 " It must be observed, remarks Sylvius, that by the third 
 and fourth rule it is ascertained that a thing has been handed 
 down by the apostles, but not whether the tradition is purely 
 apostolic, as it is distinguished from divine ; but then it will 
 be known to be such if the thing might have been instituted 
 by human authority, as is, for instance, the forty days' fast. 
 
 "5. 'Whatever the Roman Church holds as tradition, is 
 to be regarded as such,' says St. Jerome. Bk. 3. ch. 3. 
 
 " 6. Whatever the catholic church holds or de- 
 clares AS SUCH is to be REGARDED AS TRADITION." 
 
 concerning THE JUDGE OF CONTROVERSIES RESPECTING 
 THE FAITH. (69.) 
 
 Besides the inanimate rule of faith there is need of 
 an animate, (rule.) 
 
 " Is any other rule of faith to be admitted besides Sacred 
 Scripture and divine tradition ? 
 
 " Ans. Yes : Because when a controversy arises, which 
 is Sacred Scripture or tradition ; also, what their meaning is ; 
 this controversy Scripture or tradition itself cannot settle, 
 therefore there is need of another rule, viz. an animate one, 
 which may decide controversies : for every legislator who 
 founds any society whatever, ought to leave behind him, 
 those who may represent his authority for establishing the 
 authenticity, sense, &c. of the laws : in the same proportion 
 then as laws are more remote from the apprehension of men, 
 (as in the belief of the mysteries of religion, and the rules 
 of customs), the greater is the necessity of a vicarious au- 
 thority of the legislator : which certainly in the matter of 
 religion ought not to be of just any kind whatever, but in- 
 fallible, lest every thing should remain doubtful and uncer- 
 tam, and thus religion itself become useless. 
 
158 CONCERNING TRADITIONS. 
 
 " Nor is it any obstacle that the .church is not above 
 Scripture and divine tradition : for the church does not judge 
 concerning them with the judgment of power, either by 
 changing them, or by deciding whether that which Sacred 
 Scripture teaches is true or false: but it decides concerning 
 them, only -with the judgment of discretion, by discerning 
 and declaring which is Sacred Scripture or divine tradition, 
 what is their sense, &c. 
 
 " The case is different with respect to traditions merely 
 apostolical or ecclesiastical, in regard to which the church 
 exercises also the judgment of power, with the faculty of 
 changing them, &c. 
 
 " Observe, that although, besides Sacred Scripture and 
 traditions a living rule is to be admitted, yet it may rightly 
 be said that our faith rests alone on Sacred Scripture and 
 divine tradition : because nothing is believed with a divine 
 faith unless it be contained in Sacred Scripture, and divine 
 tradition. 
 
 " What is the judge of controversies concerning the faith 
 and customs ? 
 
 " Ans. The church, whether scattered or assembled in 
 general council, and the Pope the head of the church, as will 
 appear from what is to be said hereafter. 
 
 " The Lutherans and Calvinists state as the judge, Sacred 
 Scripture alone, or as understood by the private opinion of 
 every man : the English heretics pretend that this judgment 
 I belongs to secular judges." 
 
 If the Romish Church admits the divine inspiration of the 
 Scriptures, she must of course be prepared to abide by the 
 testimony of God's word. Now, the Bible, in plain and un- 
 equivocal terms, justifies us in asserting that the written word 
 of God is an all-sufficient Rule of Faith. Paul in his 
 2 Epist. to Tim. iii. 15, 16, 17, plainly declares, "that the 
 Scriptures are able to make us wise unto salvation. They 
 are profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for in- 
 struction in righteousness : that the man of God may be 
 
 PERFECT, THOROUGHLY FURNISHED UntO all gOod WOrks," 
 
 and what more do we want ? The prophet Isaiah says, " To 
 
CONCERNING TRADITIONS. 159 
 
 the law and to the testimony : if they speak not according 
 to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Isaiah 
 never would have approved of trying the law and testimony 
 by tradition ; he was for holding up every doctrine and custom 
 before the clear light of revelation, and thus determining its 
 character. If the Scriptures are able to instruct us in every 
 good work, to teach us Christ crucified, to give us light in 
 darkness, to settle our faith, and to teach us the whole way 
 of salvation, then we ask, what do we need more 1 When 
 the lawyer stood up and asked Christ, " Master, what shall 
 I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto hini. What is 
 written in the law? How readest thou?" And when the 
 lawyer replied, " Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all 
 thy heart, &c." Christ's answer was, " This do and thou 
 shalt live." If then the Scriptures contain all things neces- 
 sary to be known in order to inherit eternal life, they must 
 be a sufficient rule of faith and practice. Common sense 
 confirms this verdict. The Church of Rome herself is in 
 fact obliged to appeal to Scripture as the only rule in many 
 cases. She cannot, for instance, prove the doctrine of the 
 Trinity by tradition, either directly or indirectly ; in this 
 case she must refer to Scripture. But if the written word ia 
 admitted to be the rule in one point, how can it be denied in 
 another ? If its testimony is received in one. case, it nj£iy 
 and ought to be acknowledged in every other in which it is 
 a competent witness, as it claims to be the word of the living 
 God. 
 
 But the Romish Church would prove the necessity of 
 tradition by an appeal to the language of Paul ; " Hold the 
 traditions which you have learned, whether by word or by 
 our Epistle." (2 Thess. ii. 14.) 
 
 1. To this we answer, that these words do not import that 
 the apostle delivered some things to them as tradition, and 
 others as Scripture, but that he taught them the same truths 
 both orally and. in writing. 
 
166 CONCERNING TRADITIONS. 
 
 2. Even supposing that the things which he thus taught 
 them were different^ this proves only that there are some 
 important and precious truths, which are not contained in 
 this Epistle to the Thessalonians, though all that is neces- 
 sary to salvation is supplied by other portions of Scripture. 
 
 3. Besides if we wish to know the nature of the things 
 which Paul delivered to them by word of mouth, we shall 
 find from Acts xvii. 2, that they were altogether Scriptural. 
 There we are told that when they came to Thessalonica, 
 " Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three 
 Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scrip- 
 tures," &c. 
 
 As for the quotation, Deut. xxxii. 7, " Ask thy father and 
 he will show thee, d&c," Moses is referring the children of 
 Israel to their immediate ancestors, who were yet living, 
 and who could recount to them the wonders of God's provi- 
 dence in former days. 
 
 The fact that Jesus Christ did and said many things during 
 his ministry, which are not written in Scripture, is not dis- 
 puted by Protestants. All that we affirm is that sufficient 
 has been recorded to make us wise unto salvation, and more 
 than this we do not need. 
 
 But it is farther asserted that heretics themselves " believe 
 many things, which are no where found in Scripture." 
 
 Of this there can be no doubt ; and orthodox Christians 
 do the same. 
 
 We know that Romish tradition teaches the virginity of 
 the Mother of our blessed Lord after his incarnation, but the 
 Bible teaches the contrary very plainly, Matt. i. 24, 25. 
 The virginity of Mary previous to the birth of Christ is a 
 doctrine of divine revelation ; her subsequent virginity is a 
 Romish invention, which we decline endorsing. As for the 
 baptism of infants, that does not rest upon tradition ; infants 
 of believing parents had a right to church membership under 
 the Old Covenant, and until we find Scripture in the New 
 
CONCERNING TRADITIONS. Iftt 
 
 Testament, which disfranchises them, we must consider them 
 fit subjects for Baptism, with all deference to the opinions of 
 those who differ from us. Whenever traditions accord with 
 and sustain the letter and spirit of Scripture, and are well 
 authenticated, we will give them all the weight they deserve. 
 In this case, we know from early ecclesiastical history that 
 Infant Baptism was practised in the Christian church. 
 
 We decline the aid of Romish tradition also, in enabling 
 us to ascertain which of the gospels are spurious, and which 
 are genuine. There is internal evidence enough to establish 
 the authenticity of the four gospels. 
 
 We do not need tradition to enable us to discover the 
 sense of Scripture; for whilst there are many passages con- 
 cerning which there has been and still is diversity of opinion, 
 we know that God has promised to give wisdom to all that 
 ask in faith, and the Holy Spirit is pledged to show every 
 sincere inquirer after truth, who searches the Scripture with 
 prayer, what he must do to be saved. 
 
 In short, notwithstanding all the specious reasoning of 
 Romanists, their arguments amount to neither more nor less 
 than a petitio principii, a begging of the question. They 
 affirm that tradition is part of God's word ; and how do they 
 prove it ? By Scripture they cannot establish their point ; its 
 testimony is decidedly against them ; and if they seek to 
 prove their position by tradition itself, or by the authority of 
 the Church, which rests upon tradition, they argue in a 
 vicious circle. 
 
 The blasphemous assertion that there is more need op 
 
 DIVINE TRADITION THAN OF SACRED SCRIPTURE, is WOrthy 
 
 of the apostate source in which it originates. 
 
 The doctrine of the necessity of unwritten traditions is 
 inconsistent with the perfection of the Scriptures, and utterly 
 repugnant to the object for which they were designed. They 
 were intended as the Rule of Faith ; but a rule which is not 
 sufficient to answer its purpose is no rule at all. But not 
 14 
 
162 CONCERNING TRADITIONS. 
 
 only are the Scriptures sufficient in themselves to make men 
 wise unto salvation, thoroughly furnished unto all good works, 
 &c., but God expressly forbids any thing to be added to his 
 word, upon any pretext whatsoever. Paul pronounces an 
 anathema upon any man, and even any angel from heaven, 
 that should preach another gospel. (Gal. i. 8.) And the ca- 
 non of Scripture closes with a dreadful curse denounced upon 
 any man who should add to, or take from the word. (Rev* 
 xxii. 18.) How then can we receive those traditions, which 
 are declared to be of more necessity than sacked scrip- 
 
 ture 
 
 Whenever God gave laws or directions of any kind to hia 
 church, ever since the days of Moses, he has generally caused 
 it to be done in writing : " Go write it in a table, note it in a 
 book, that it may be for the time to come." (Is. xxx. 8.) " To 
 write the same things to you, for you, is safe." (Phil. iii. 1.) 
 In Rev. ii. it is said, " Write" to the churches, not " deliver 
 a tradition to them." Indeed we may rest assured that God 
 would not permit any doctrine or truth necessary to salva- 
 tion to depend upon the uncertain transmission of traditions, 
 which are liable to be corrupted through carelessness or pre- 
 judice. 
 
 The notion of the insufficiency of the Scriptures, the ad- 
 dition of traditions or " unwritten verities," was first intro- 
 duced by the Carpocratians and other heretics, and is directly 
 what the apostle has forewarned us against. " Beware, lest 
 any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after 
 the TRADITION of men." 
 
 The voice of the purest antiquity is against tradition. Jus- 
 tin in Tryphonem, says. If we will be safe in all things, we 
 must fly to the Scriptures ; we must believe God only, and 
 rest wholly on his institutions, and not on men^s traditions. 
 
 Irenseus, lib. 3. ch. xiii., says of the apostles, that what 
 they preached by mouth, they left us in writing, to be the 
 pillar and ground-work of our faith. 
 
CONCERNING TRADITIONS. 163 
 
 Tertullian, de Prsescript, speaks plainly, and to the point. 
 It were folly or madness (says he) to think that the apostle 
 knew all things, but revealed the same to few ; delivering 
 some things openly to all, but. reserving some others to be 
 spoken in secret to some. And again : " We have no cause 
 to be curious after Christ, nor inquisitive after the gospel, 
 (viz. for any other things to be believed in order to salvation.) 
 " When we believe, the first thing which we believe is, that 
 there is nothing further which we ought to believe." 
 
 Basilffe Serm. de fide, says ; " It is a manifest defection 
 from the faith to bring any thing that is not written." 
 
 And as a counterpart to the alleged quotation from Jerome, 
 " Whatever the Roman church holds as tradition is to be 
 regarded as such," I beg leave to offer the following from 
 the same father, on Hag. chap. i. " All traditions pretended 
 to be apostolic, if they have not their authority from the 
 Scriptures, are cut off by the sword of God." 
 
 But we cannot dismiss this point without calling attention 
 to the short and easy method of determining traditions. 
 " Whatever the Catholic church holds or declares as such, 
 is to be regarded as tradition.^'' This settles the apostolic 
 character of the Mass, Extreme Unction, Invocation of Saints, 
 Merit of Works, the Supremacy of the Pope, Holy water, 
 Holy bones. Holy stones, and other Holy relics. Prayers for 
 the dead, Auricular Confession, Penance, Indulgences, Image 
 worship. Celibacy of the Priests, &c. &c. The church of 
 Christ has ever protested against these impious inventions, 
 and has demanded the reason of their introduction. Are 
 they taught by Scripture? No! Will you abandon them? 
 Abandon them ? Not we — they are apostolical traditions ! 
 But where is the proof? The proof is here, and let heretics 
 read it and ever after hold their peace ; " Whatever the 
 Catholic Church holds or declares as such, is to be 
 regarded as tradition !" 
 
164 CONCERNING THE CHURCH. 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 Concerning the Chwck. (70.) 
 
 *' What is the church 1 
 
 " The church, generally taken, can be defined for every 
 state, place, and time, (as the) congregation of the faithful 
 united in the true worship of God under Christ their head ; 
 which definition comprehends also the faithful of the Old 
 Testament, not only those who pertained to the synagogue, 
 but also other believers out of the synagogue, as Job, Mel- 
 chisedeck, &c. ; also the blessed, likewise angels, &c., souls 
 detained in purgatory. 
 
 " How is the church divided, generally taken ? 
 
 " It is' divided into three members, namely, the church 
 triumphant, suffering, and militant. 
 
 " The church triumphant embraces all the blessed in hea- 
 ven, as well angels as men : the church patient or suffering 
 is the assembly of souls detained in purgatory : militant is 
 the assembly of the faithful in a state of pilgrimage, or of 
 such who are as yet travailling upon earth. 
 
 *' The church militant may be subdivided into the church 
 of the Old Testament, viz. from Adam to Christ, which 
 comprehended both Jews and Gentiles professing the true 
 faith ; an.d into the church of the New Testament, concern- 
 ing which in the following sections. 
 
 " What is the church of the New Testament 1 
 
 " By Canisius it is defined : * the congregation of all peo- 
 ple professing the faith and doctrine of Christ, which is 
 governed under one next to Christ, the chief head and pas- 
 tor upon earth.' " 
 
 CONCERNING THOSE WHO ARE IN THE CHURCH. (71.) 
 
 *' Are unbaptized persons in the church ? 
 
 " No, because baptism is the gate, through which we come 
 into the church, as the Council of Trent, sess. xiv. ch. 2. 
 teaches ; and hence also, (Acts, ii. 41,) those who were bap- 
 tized were said to be added, as to Christ's mystical body 
 
CONCERNING THE CHURCH. 165 
 
 which is the church : ' they therefore that received his word 
 were baptized ; and there were added to them in that day 
 about three thousand souls,' therefore, before they were not 
 of the church. 
 
 " Cannot Catechumens, indeed, be said to belong to the 
 church 1 
 
 " No, for the same reason that they have not yet entered 
 through baptism. 
 
 " Obj. According to the fourth Lat. Counc, no one out 
 of the church can be saved ; but a Catechumen may be 
 saved through perfect contrition; therefore he is in the 
 church. 
 
 " Ans. I distinguish the inference : I deny the inference 
 that he is therefore in the church really ; I agree entirely 
 that he is in the church as to vow and desire ; but it is 
 enough for a Catechumen to be saved, that he be in the 
 church by vow or desire, (because he is enlbraced in perfect 
 contrition :) and hence the words of the Lateran Council 
 should be understood of those, who are in the church neither 
 in reality, nor by vow. 
 
 "But at least are not those in the church, who are sup- 
 posed to be baptized, and thus commune in the participation 
 of the sacraments and the confession of faith, although in 
 fact they have not been baptized 1 
 
 " Ans. Wiggers, with some others, says yes : but Bellar- 
 mine, Steyaert, Daleman, Danes, &c., say no, for reasons 
 already mentioned : yet such persons although not in reality, 
 yet belong to the church by vow, and thus can be saved. 
 
 "Are all baptized persons in the church? 
 
 " No : and especially manifest heretics and apostates are 
 not of the church; because they do not profess the same 
 faith and doctrine with those, who are in the church ; but 
 this is expressed in the definition of the church. 
 
 " Obj. The church judges and punishes heretics ; but it 
 does not judge those, who are without, according to the 
 apostle, 1 Cor. v. 12. ' What have I to do to judge those 
 that are without?' Therefore they are in the church. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : for although heretics are 
 out of the church, yet by reason of baptism they remain 
 subject to the church : and hence she justly punishes 
 
 THEM AS DESERTERS FROM THE CAMP OF THE CHURCH, 
 14* 
 
166 CONCERNING THE CHURCH. 
 
 and, therefore, they are under obligation of returning; but 
 the apostle speaks of those, who have never entered the 
 church or have never been baptized. 
 
 " Open schismatics are also not in the church : for they 
 have separated themselves from the unity of the church : 
 and hence the church in Parasceve, just as she prays for 
 heretics that they may return to the church, prays also for 
 schismatics. 
 
 " Do secret heretics belong to the church 1 the same is 
 asked concerning secret apostates. 
 
 " Ans, There is a difference of opinion among authors : 
 if they are secret, merely internal heretics, it seems proper 
 to say that such persons are in the church ; because neither 
 has the church separated them, nor have they separated 
 themselves from the visible union of the church ; whence it 
 may be said, that they still are members of the church, not 
 indeed living, but dead and dry, as a withered arm may still 
 be called a member of the body. 
 
 " But if they are external, secret heretics, then it appears 
 they are not in the church ; because by this very fact they 
 have been excommunicated or cut off from the church. 
 
 "Yet Daelman plausibly supposes that excommunicated, 
 but not interdicted persons are in the church, although they 
 are deprived of the- internal influences and communion of the 
 Saints, not by right, but in fact, and through the indulgence 
 of the church ; and hence they are iiot deprived of jurisdic- 
 tion, as was said. No. 56. According to Daelman, there- 
 fore, it is probable that those excommunicated persons alone 
 are out of the church, who by a particular sentence have 
 been by name denounced as such. 
 
 " From what has been said, it is inferred that all those are 
 out of the church, who either have not entered the church, 
 or whom the church casts from her, or who of their own 
 accord have separated themselves from the church." 
 
 The 72d section discusses the question whether all the 
 elect, and they only, are in the church, and concludes with 
 this summary as the result of the investigation. 
 
 " From what has been said, you may gather, who are 
 members of the Church militant, viz. all persons truly bap- 
 tized, externally professing the Catholic faith, and partaking 
 of the sacraments of the church, with due subjection towards 
 
CONCERNING THE CHURCH. 1G7 
 
 the lawful pastors of the church, especially the Roman 
 Pontiff. 
 
 " Observe that the doctrine of the heretics by which they 
 assert that the church consists of the elect only, or of the 
 just alone, tends to this that they may make the church in- 
 visible, and hence let section 73 treat 
 
 Of the msihility of the church. 
 
 " Is the church visible ? 
 
 " 1. Yes. This is proved from Matt. v. 14, where it is 
 said concerning the church : ' a city set upon a hill cannot 
 be hid ;' and thus the church is not only visible, but evidently 
 conspicuous, like a city set upon a hill :*as Augustine, &c. 
 says, ' The church stands forth before all, clear and con- 
 spicuous, for it is a city, built upon a hill, which cannot be 
 hid.' 
 
 "2. It is proved from Matt, xviii. 16, where Christ com- 
 mands that the faithful should tell it to the church, that is, to 
 the superiors of the church, when private fraternal reproof 
 does no. good : and again he commands, that if a reproved 
 brother shall not hear the church, he must be regarded as a 
 heathen and a publican ; now he cannot be denounced to the 
 church, nor hear her, if the church is invisible; therefore, &c. 
 
 " 3. It is proved from reason ; all ought to come to the 
 church under peril of eternal damnation ; therefore, it must 
 be visible or cognizable. 
 
 Obj. I. Christ says to the Samaritan woman, John iv. 23, 
 * The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers 
 shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth ;' therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans, I deny the inference : for that (phrase) ' in spirit,' 
 does not exclude external worship; but teaches that to 
 external worship internal is to be joined : and hence it is 
 opposed to the worship of the Jews and the Samaritans, 
 most of whom stopped in external rites only ; and the ex- 
 pression, ' in truth,' is opposed to the figures of the old law, 
 or also to the worship of the Samaritans, which was mixed 
 up with many corruptions. 
 
 " Obj. II. Christ says, Luke xvii. 20, ' The kingdom of 
 God does not come with observation ;' therefore the church 
 cannot be observed or seen. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : for there the question is not 
 
1G8 CONCERNING THE CHURCH. 
 
 concerning the church, but the kingdom of God is put for 
 the coming of Messiah ; and hence the meaning is, Messiah 
 does not come with observation, i. e., with pomp and royal 
 parade, as the Jews expected. 
 
 " How is the church said to be visible ? 
 
 " Ans. The church is formally to be seen and known not 
 only through faith and the understanding, but also by physi- 
 cal senses; because the church is not only spiritual by rea- 
 son of the internal form of faith, hope, charity, &c., but it 
 also is a certain material and sensible body, because it em- 
 braces a visible head, visible persons, the external profession 
 of faith, sensible sacraments, the order of a visible priest- 
 hood. 
 
 " Through what is the church seen sensibly ? 
 
 " Ans. By her own marks, which are so peculiar to our 
 church, that they can be found in no other congregation or 
 sect ; and hence the church is visible, not only to the faith- 
 ful, but also to those who do not hold the faith, as heretics, 
 Jews, and Gentiles." 
 
 The arrogant demand of the Romish Church to be re- 
 garded as the only and the true Church of Christ, containing 
 in her communion all who shall be saved, deserves no re- 
 futation. We pass by this impudent claim with sincere pity 
 for the deluded members of that apostate church, whom 
 " with all deceivableness of unrighteousness," she entices 
 from the way of God's testimonies. Our theologian in con- 
 tending for the visibility of the Church against " the here- 
 tics," is wasting his eloquence and his prowess upon a man 
 of straw. We believe in a visible church. We need not 
 be told that the Church of Christ and the private members 
 also of that church are as a city set on a hill that cannot be 
 hid. Surely the church of Rome has sufficient reason both 
 to know and feel that the Protestant church is visible ; if she 
 does not know it, the noble army of martyrs, who were 
 slain by the blood-thirsty minions of the Pope, stand forth 
 as witnesses, who being dead yet speak. The flames of 
 persecution, which have reddened the sky of every kingdom 
 
CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 169 
 
 and country, which the Babylonish woman has intoxicated 
 with the wine of her lewdness and blasphemy, have made 
 the Protestant church a burning and a shining lisht in the 
 world. We yiem the point, however, that the church of 
 Rome has her own peculiar marks. She bears upon her 
 brazen face the marks of the beast, mentioned in the 
 Apocalypse. They are so indelibly stamped upon her brow, 
 that he who reads her history cannot fail to recognise her as 
 the base deceiver and apostate, against whom the finger of 
 divine prophecy is pointed. These marks are superstition, 
 
 PERFIDY, FALSEHOOD, and BLOOD. 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 Concerning the Marks of the Church. (74.) 
 
 " What is understood by a mark of the church ? 
 
 " A certain sign and peculiarity by which the true church 
 can be known, and discerned from all other assemblies. 
 
 " How many are the marks of the church? 
 
 " Four principal ones are enumerated, expressed in the 
 Constantinopolitan symbol, viz. that she is one, holy, catho- 
 lic and apostolic. 
 
 " That these are the marks of the true church, the au- 
 thority of the symbol just quoted, and the consent of the 
 apostles and fathers prove : these reason proves and Scrip- 
 ture attests. 
 
 " Calvin and sectarians appoint only two marks of the 
 church, viz. the sincere preaching of the word of God, and 
 the legitimate use of the sacraments. 
 
 " These two, although they are found in the true church 
 of Christ, are yet foolishly laid down as marks of the 
 church : for the marks ought to be more notorious than the 
 thing, which they are to characterize: but it is at least as 
 difficult to know which is the sincere preaching of the word 
 of God, (and) which is the legitimate use of the sacraments, 
 as which is the true church. 
 
170 CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 "But as the four abovementioned marks pertain to the 
 Roman Catholic Church alone, it follows that she is the 
 ONLY church of Christ : and in order that this may ap^^ear 
 m#re clearly, we will consider them one by one." 
 
 Concerning the mark of the church by which she is called 
 ONE. (75.) 
 
 " Prove that unity is the mark of the true church. 
 
 " It is proved from various texts of Sacred Scripture, in 
 which unity is attributed to the church : thus, it is said, John 
 X. 16., ' one fold and one pastor;' and John xvii. 21, Christ 
 prays for unity for his sheep : that they all may be one ; 
 also the apostle, 1 Cor. x. 17., says, ' We being many are 
 one body,' and Eph. iv. 4, 5. ' One body, one faith, one bap- 
 tism.' 
 
 " This unity all the fathers acknowledged in time past, 
 and from it they confuted heretics and schismatics ; amongst 
 them, St. Cyprian wrote his book concerning the unity of 
 the church. 
 
 " In what does the unity of the church consist? 
 
 *' In unity of head, in unity of faith and doctrine, in the 
 consent of minds, in the communion of the same sacra- 
 ments, and of other things pertaining to the communion of 
 the Saints. 
 
 " Unity of head is found in the Roman Catholic Church ; 
 because in it there is no visible head under Christ except the 
 Roman Pontiff, to whom all the bishops and the faithful are 
 subordinate, and are united as in a centre of unity, and who 
 exercises visible jurisdiction and rule over the whole church. 
 
 " This unity of the church is manifestly found in no sect, 
 not even among the Greeks, who obey different Patriarchs. 
 
 " Unity of faith and doctrine, equally shines forth in the 
 Roman Catholic Church, in which all the faithful, although 
 scattered over the whole earth, believe the same doctrines 
 of faith ; neither in any definitions of the church, con- 
 cerning the faith, can repugnant things he proved ; but 
 among heretics and schismatics there is no agreement of 
 faith ; but there are as many opinions as heads ; as many 
 faiths as wills. 
 
 " You will say : In the Roman Church there is also 
 diversity of doctrine, because the doctrines of the Thomists, 
 
CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 171 
 
 Scotists, and Molinists, are opposed to one another in many- 
 things ; therefore, &c. 
 
 " 1 deny the inference : for as has been said, the unity of 
 faith and doctrine is in this, that Catholics beUeve the same 
 doctrines of faith ; to which it is no obstacle that there are dif- 
 ferent opinions of the school, which, when not injuring the 
 faith, the church permits to be defended for the elucidation 
 of truth, and the exercise of the schools, which are pre- 
 pared to submit their opinions to one judge, the Roman 
 Pontiff and the church ; but heretics dissent in things per- 
 taining to the faith, nor do they acknowledge any judge to 
 whom they may submit themselves. 
 
 " There is also in the church, a consent^ or union of minds, 
 like the union of sheep of the same fold, and like that of 
 members of the same body. The same is readily apparent 
 from the communion of the sacraments, and the communion 
 of the saints." 
 
 We do most cordially embrace the doctrine of the unity 
 of the Church of Christ ; we believe that Christ has a visible 
 church upon earth, constituting part of the Universal Church 
 to which the innumerable company of angels, and the spirits 
 of just men made perfect, also belong. The visible church 
 is scattered over the whole earth : but every man, woman, 
 and child, who loves the Lord Jesus Christ, and keeps his 
 commandments, is a member of that church, and shines forth 
 as a constituent part of Christ's mystical body. Wherever two 
 or three true believers are gathered together in Christ's name, 
 there you have a particular church, inheriting all the promises 
 and blessings of the New Covenant as fully as the largest 
 congregation of believers upon earth. The word of God 
 designates all as God's children, who love the Lord Jesus 
 Christ ; into their hearts he has sent forth the spirit of 
 adoption, whereby they cry, " Abba Father," giving them m 
 this witness of the Holy Ghost, the seal of their acceptance, 
 and the pledge and earnest of their heavenly inheritance. 
 By whatever name they may be called, the members of 
 Christ's body are one ; they love the same Saviour, they 
 
172 CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 have been purchased by the same blood, they are animated 
 by the same hope, they are partaking of hke precious faith, 
 contending against the same enemies, and pressing forward 
 to the same eternal and glorious home. They are one with 
 Christ, and one with each other. In the great doctrines of 
 the Bible involving salvation, they agree entirely. There is 
 not a shadow of difference between the evangelical repentance 
 and faith of any two Christians on the face of God's earth. 
 We care not how they may be called, they are addicted to 
 no master but Christ, whose image they bear. Let a Pres- 
 byterian, or a Baptist, or a Methodist, or an Episcopalian, 
 who are the friends of Jesus Christ, be thrown together by 
 God's providence, and, however they may differ in minor 
 matters, they will all testify, that they love the Lord who 
 bought them, and that they love one another with a pure 
 heart fervently. Names of human invention cannot sepa- 
 rate the true children of God ; whenever they meet they 
 coalesce like kindred drops of water, and are one in heart, 
 and in all the essentials of faith. " He that is joined to the 
 Lord is one spirit," 1 Cor. vi. 17. This is the unity which 
 marks the Church of Christ ; this is the unity for which the 
 blessed Saviour prayed, when he was about to be led out as 
 a lamb to the slaughter. I admit there are many who are 
 the professed followers of Christ who manifest none of these 
 traits of Christian character; but what then? all are not 
 Israel that are of Israel ! 
 
 There are tares among the wheat, and there are hypocrites 
 , within the pale of the visible church, just as there are un- 
 fruitful branches on every vine, and withered limbs on every 
 tree ; and yet the withered limbs and boughs cannot affect 
 the unity of the vine and its branches. In the time of the 
 harvest they will be gathered and thrown into the fire ; but 
 meanwhile, we leave them where they are. Christ never 
 meant that his church should be distinguished merely by 
 unity in matters of human invention, which must necessarily 
 
CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 173 
 
 be affected by circumstances and expediency. Where did 
 ne ever say that his church was to be under the government 
 of a Supreme Pontiff*? The word of God tells us that all 
 power is committed to Christ in heaven and on earth ; but 
 it nowhere tells us that the Lord Jesus has delegated this 
 power to the Pope ! The Romish Church glories in her uni- 
 ty ! She is known as the true church of Christ, because she 
 is ONE. She acknowledges but one head, not many heads, 
 — and that one head is Christ's vicar, the Pope ! 1 We 
 envy her not such a head. We cleave to Christ, the living 
 head of his body the church ; we have no other master, and 
 we never will own another ! God is our witness, by his 
 grace we will ever belong to the Christian but never to he 
 Popish Church. 
 
 Oh ! but, says the Papist, we acknowledge Christ too as 
 the Supreme Head of the church ! Do you indeed ? So you 
 acknowledge two heads ; where then is your boasted uni- 
 ty ? The Church of Rome claims to have a head in heaven, 
 and a head on earth ; we glory in being able to testify, 
 One is our head, even Christ! 
 
 God " hath put all things under his feet, and given him to 
 be THE Head over all to the church, which is his body, the 
 fulness of him that filleth all in all." (Eph. i. 22, 23.) « He 
 is the HEAD of the body, the church ; who is the beginning, 
 the first-born from the dead ; that in all things he might 
 have the preeminence." (Col. i. 18.) We do affectionately 
 and earnestly entreat those, who acknowledge the jurisdic- 
 tion of the Pope, in the language of Paul, " that ye hence- 
 forth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried 
 about with every wind of doctrine by the sleight of men 
 and cunning craftiness^ whereby they lie in wait to deceive ; 
 but speaking the truth in love may grow up into him in all 
 things, which is the head, even Christ." (Eph. iv. 14, 
 15.) 
 
 But then there are so many sects in the Protestant Church. 
 15 
 
174 CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 There you have Methodists, and Calvinists, and Mormons^ 
 and Lutherans, &c. &c. How does that tally with the unity 
 of Christ's Church? There were sects in Paul's time; one 
 said, I am of Paul ; another, I am of Cephas ; and another, 
 I am of Apollos ; but still they were all of Christ after all ; 
 they addicted themselves to one teacher in preference to an- 
 other, just as, in our day, some are of Wesley, and others 
 of Calvin, and others of Luther, and others of Zuinglius ! 
 And we need to be reminded as Paul admonished the Chris- 
 tians in his day ; was Wesley crucified for you, or were ye 
 baptized into the name of Calvin 1 But, whilst we acknow- 
 ledge that there are different denominations of Christians, we 
 deny that there is more than one true church, or more than 
 ONE true Head of the church. All believers belong to the 
 Church of Christ, no matter how they are called ; just as 
 soldiers of the same regiment, and belonging to the same 
 army, and commanded by the same general, may fight un- 
 der different banners, wear different uniforms, and use differ- 
 ent weapons. Notwithstanding the difference of sects, the 
 Church of Christ stands forth ** fair as the moon, clear as 
 the sun, and terrible as an army with banners ;" and this 
 the Pope's church knows to her cost. As for the Mormons, 
 whom Romish priests take pleasure in enumerating among 
 Protestant denominations, we respectfully decline their fel- 
 lowship, and we would advise the leaders of those poor dupes 
 to sell the golden plates and the copyright of the book of Mor- 
 mon to those persons who place great store upon vain tradi- 
 tions, and who believe in revelations, subsequent to the closing 
 of the canon ! For our part, we should not know what to do 
 with them, as we do not deal in such merchandise. But, 
 whilst Romanists cry out against the sects of the Protestant 
 Church, do they not forget their own? There are vastly 
 more ♦sects in the Romish than there are in the Protestant 
 Church ! I "have before me a work, published with the license 
 of th^t most Catholic monarch, the Emperor of Austria, 
 
CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHUJICH. 175 
 
 which contains the history, with painted delineations of 
 some hundreds of orders of holy brotherhoods and holy 
 sisterhoods, of monks and nuns, black, white, and grey. 
 And amongst them, there are some denominations of 
 Christians, who have stranger names than any of the 
 wildest and most fanatical sects of which we have ever 
 heard. Thus in Biedenfeld's history of the different orders 
 of monks and nuns, we read of the " Society of grey peni- 
 tents," founded, A. D. 1578 ; of the " Reformed grey sisters, 
 at Mens," founded, 1689 ; of " White penitents, at Avignon," 
 and another brotherhood of penitents of the same colour, at 
 Lyons. Then there are " Priests of the holy nail, at Suenia," 
 founded in 1567 ; " Blue penitents at Rome," (1571 ;) Black 
 penitents at Rome, (1577.) « Tailor-brethren," (1647;) 
 "Shoemaker-brethren of poor Henry," (1645.) "Daugh- 
 ters of the childhood of Christ," (1657.) "Brethren of 
 stillness and solitude," (1664 ;) " Sisters of stillness and 
 solitude," " Sisters of the child Jesus," (1678 ;) "Brethren 
 of the child Jesus," (1681.) " Daughters of the good Shep- 
 herd," (1686.) " Nuns for the continual adoration of the 
 Holy Sacrament," (1653.) "Congregation of the conse- 
 crated of the Most Holy Mother of God," (1832,) &c., &c., 
 &c. These are selected out of about 500 different religious 
 orders ; and are presented as specimens of the sects of the 
 Romish Church; there is probably much more difference 
 between the blue and grey, and black and white penitents, 
 than there is between any of the leading evangelical denomi- 
 nations of the Protestant Church. And certainly amid all 
 the dissensions, which have disgraced Protestant Christen- 
 dom, there never have been feuds so deadly as those, which 
 have obtained between some of the rival orders of monks in 
 the Romish Church. 
 
 A volume might be written concerning the bickerings and 
 jealousies between the Jesuits and the secular priests, during 
 Queen Elizabeth's reign ; if the testimony of the secular 
 
176 CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCIi 
 
 priests is to be believed, the Jesuits in those days must have 
 been the very ofF-scouring of the earth ; and if the Jesuits' 
 declarations are worthy of credit, the secular priests were as 
 bad as themselves. 
 
 As for unity in matters of doctrine, it will be as easy to 
 persuade Quakers to become Episcopalians, as to reconcile 
 the Dominicans and the Jesuits ; and all Protestant sects will 
 agree as soon as the Thomists and the Scotists ; Presbyte- 
 rians and Independents will unite with Episcopalians far 
 more readily than the monastic orders will yield thefr privi- 
 leges; Arminians and Calvinists will be all of one mind 
 when the Jansenists and Molinists are. Our controversies 
 about ceremonies are not quite of as much importance as 
 those which are waged in the Church of Rome concerning 
 Infallibility. We find some theologians of the Church of 
 Rome contending that the Pope is infallible, others, that he 
 is anything but infallible ; some insist that he has temporal 
 power, others maintain that his jurisdiction is entirely spi- 
 ritual. Some maintain that the Virgin Mary was conceived 
 without original sin, others affirm that she was not. Some 
 teach that souls may be delivered out of purgatory, others 
 hold the contrary. The advocates of these various theories 
 have written and railed and preached against one another in 
 a most edifying and fraternal manner. Now, when the 
 CHUECH, the infallible judge in matters of controversy, set- 
 tles her own disputes, it will be time enough for Protestant 
 sects to invite Holy Mother to be the umpire between them ; 
 as matters stand at present, we must decline her intervention, 
 particularly as some of her own doctors declare that the 
 doctrine of the Pope's infallibility is heresy. 
 
 Moreover, the unity of the Papal Church has been sadly 
 marred by schisms between rival popes ; in repeated in- 
 stances, there have been several competitors for the chair of 
 St. Peter, and if there is any virtue in anathemas, then many 
 a Pope is doomed beyond recovery. Bellarmine in his chro- 
 
CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 177 
 
 nology confesses twenty-six several schisms in the Church 
 of Rome ; but Onuphrius computes thirty ; of these, some 
 lasted ten, others twenty, and one fifty years, and caused 
 blood to flow in streams. Oh ! how beautifully does the 
 Church of Rome preserve the unity of the Spirit in the 
 bond of peace; and with what lustre does she shine forth 
 as the ONE and only Church of Christ ! 
 
 Concerning the Marie of the Church by which she is 
 called Holy. (No. 76.) 
 
 " That sanctity is a mark of the Church, is proved, Eph. 
 V. 25. * Christ loved the Church, and delivered himself up 
 for it, that he might sanctify it ;' hence the faithful are called 
 by St. Peter, 1 Ep. ii. 9, ' a chosen generation, a holy na- 
 tion.' Add to this, the Apostles' Creed, in which it is said, 
 * I believe the Holy Catholic Church.' 
 
 *' What does this mark, the Sanctity of the Church, mean ? 
 
 " It means not only that Christ, the Head and Author of 
 the Church, is holy, but also the sanctity of the persons be- 
 ing in the Church, the sanctity of doctrine, of the sacraments, 
 laws, &c., confirmed by miracles : which sanctity, again, is 
 found nowhere except in our church, which has always had 
 men conspicuous by their sanctity, whom the very cham- 
 pions of the Protestants themselves have acknowledged as 
 holy men : as is to be seen in the history of the variations 
 of the most illustrious Bossuet. (Bk. 3. n. 50.) 
 
 " Obj. I. Holiness lies concealed in the soul : therefore it 
 does not pertain to the marks of the Church, which ought to 
 be visible. 
 
 " Ans. Sanctity is not so concealed, but that it manifests 
 itself externally, and becomes visible according to its effects : 
 just as the mind in man is invisible, and yet manifests itself 
 by works : and although the sanctity of each one in par- 
 ticular may not so certainly be known, yet we see the sanc- 
 tity of the church in the community, when we observe some 
 leading an austere life, others devoting themselves entirely 
 to the duties of piety, &c. Add to this, that God frequently 
 declares through miracles, the sanctity of private individuals, 
 which beyond the church is never done, 
 15 * 
 
178 CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 " Ohj. II. In the church there are more bad than good : 
 therefore it is not rightly called holy. 
 
 " I deny the inference : for the church is not called holy 
 as though all who are in it should be holy ; but because all 
 are holy by their calling and profession ; and because many 
 in it are holy, who are the better part ; and because out 
 
 OF IT, THEY CANNOT BE HOLY. 
 
 " Besides, that there are bad people in the church, does 
 not arise from the doctrines and principles, which the church 
 proposes, but she is opposed to them : but that heretics are 
 
 BAD, proceeds FRO^ THEIR DOCTRINES AND PRINCIPLES : 
 
 for the doctrine of protestants is that good works are not 
 necessary to salvation, that faith alone is sufficient for salva- 
 tion, that human laws are not binding on the conscience, 
 &c." 
 
 That the church of Christ is holy, and that every true 
 member of Christ's body is holy ; in short that there can be 
 no union or communion between Christ and any soul with- 
 out holiness, is plainly a doctrine of the word of God. There 
 are many in nominal connection with the professed people 
 of God, and in the outward communion of the church, who 
 have never been regenerated and sanctified, but they are not 
 members of the church of Christ, though they profess to 
 be. The church of Rome claims to be the only society of 
 true believers upon earth. Out of it, men cannot be 
 
 HOLY ! 
 
 We are prepared to assume the reverse, of this proposition, 
 and to prove that no man can carry out the principles of the 
 Romish Church, and be holy. Holiness consists in the love 
 of God and man. Popery is the enemy of both. When 
 did the Saviour or his apostles either recommend or practise 
 the doctrines which it inculcates relative to the treatment of 
 heretics ? They endured persecution and death for the sake 
 of the truth, but they never inflicted either. In meekness 
 they instructed those who opposed them, and being reviled 
 they blessed. But the church of Rome consigns to the dun- 
 geon and the stake, those, who cannot violate their con- 
 
CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 179 
 
 sciences by conforming to her idolatry and impiety ! The 
 sanctity of the church of Rome ! ! To speak of her as holy 
 according to the principles of the Bible, would be resented 
 even by her own priests as merciless sarcasm. Her history 
 .,s an accumulation of instances of cruelty, lewdness, per- 
 fidy, superstition, and deceit, such as the annals of no other 
 power present. Surely if the pope were really Christ's 
 vicar upon earth, the men, who have filled the chair of 
 St. Peter would have been addicted at least to no flagrant 
 violations of decorum ; the world and the church would not 
 have been disgraced by the execrable lives of some of the 
 nominal successors of Peter, who were notorious for profli- 
 gacy and crime, from which ordinary criminals recoil with 
 horror. And yet every one of these men bore the modest 
 title of " His Holiness ;" and thus, we have the strange 
 anomaly of " His Holiness," being at one time an adulterer, 
 at another, a murderer, at another, an avowed sorcerer, at 
 another, a blasphemer. The instances of popes, who have 
 been merely negatively good men are more than equalled in 
 the number of those, who were notoriously bad. 
 
 But even admitting that the church of Rome is not re- 
 sponsible for the character of her Supreme Pontiffs, how is 
 it possible that there should be holiness in that church, whose 
 members are required to believe and endorse such blasphemy 
 as the following : " The faithful must give to the Holy Sa- 
 crament of the altar that divine adoration that is due to God 
 only ; and it must be no reason to prevent this, that Christ 
 our Lord gave it to be eaten !" Council of Trent, sess. xiii. 
 ch. 5. 
 
 As for the perversions of Protestant doctrine, which are 
 contained in the closing remarks of the last chapter, one of 
 two things is certain. The writer either did not know that 
 he was misrepresenting the tenets of Protestants, or he did 
 know it. If the former, we can both pity and pardon him ; 
 and if the latter, he has given a practical illustration of the 
 
180 CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 sanctity of the Romish Church. " The doctrine of Pro- 
 testants is that good works are not necessary to Salvation^ 
 that faith alone is sufficient for Salvation, that human 
 laws are not binding on the conscience,^'' &c. Now the 
 poor papist, who believes whatever his holiness or his reve- 
 rence teaches, will naturally infer from such language that 
 we Protestants must in strict conformity with our principles 
 be Antinomians, and disturbers of the public peace. But 
 that we even doubt the necessity of good works is false. 
 We deny that good works merit salvation, either in whole or 
 in part ; but we affirm that the faith, by which we are justi- 
 fied, works by love, and that whenever there is opportunity 
 of evidencing the existence of saving faith, it will be proved 
 by the holiness of its possessor — and we always testify that 
 the faith which does not produce good works is utterly worth- 
 less before God and man. 
 
 The assertion that Protestants hold " that human laws are 
 not binding on the conscience," is not true in the unqualified 
 sense in which it is stated. We are bound to obey God ra- 
 ther than man, and if laws were to be enacted, which in 
 their practical operation would be contrary to the law of God, 
 Protestants, who deserve the name, would mther die than 
 yield obedience. But all governments, which leave us free 
 to worship God according to the dictates of our conscience, 
 will find the strongest supporters of the dignity of the laws 
 in the Protestant portion of the community. If, however, 
 the Church of Rome should ever gain such an ascendency 
 in this country as to obtain the control of the secular power, 
 and if she were then to attempt to enforce her abominable 
 rites and principles by a political arm, she would find Pro- 
 testants resisting her tyranny unto death, and rallying around 
 the standard of civil and religious liberty I Protestants will 
 never entrust their consciences to the keeping of the Church 
 of Rome ; nor will they ever permit the Pope to make laws 
 for them. 
 
CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 181 
 
 Concerning the Mark of the Church, by which she is call- 
 ed Catholic. 
 
 " What is signified by the mark of the Church, by which 
 she is called Catholic? 
 
 " It is signified that she is diffused over the whole earth, 
 or is universal in place, people, and time ; according to that, 
 Apoc. V. 9. * Thou hast redeemed us . ^ . .from every tribe, 
 and tongue, and people, and nation.' But it is universal as 
 to place and people, because it is diffused through all places 
 and nations. It is universal as to time, because from the 
 time at which the Church of the New Testament began, it 
 shall always endure without any intermission, even to the 
 end of the world. 
 
 " But it is predicted that the church would be such, Ps. ii. 
 8. * Ask of me, and I will give thee the Gentiles for thy. in- 
 heritance, and the utmost parts of the earth for thy posses- 
 sion ;' and Mai. i. 11 : ' For from the rising of the sun even 
 to the going down, my name is great among the Gentiles ; 
 and in every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to 
 my name a clean oblation ;' and Matt, xxviii. 19 : * Go ye, 
 therefore, and teach all nations ;' and Acts i. 8 : * You shall 
 be witnesses unto me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and 
 Samaria, and even to the uttermost parts of the earth.' 
 
 " That this mark of the Church is peculiar to ours is plain ; 
 for in every place, and every nation. Catholics are found, 
 who all, however much scattered, are united under the obe- 
 dience of the Roman Pontiff: also have been in every time, 
 and will be, Catholics : whereas all other sects are confined 
 to some part of the world, and their time of origin is easily 
 shown, which they, for the most part, also betray by their very 
 name, whilst some are called Lutherans, others Calvinists, 
 &c., from their own authors and inventors, respectively, &c. 
 
 " Obj. I. The Mahometan religion is more widely diffused 
 than the Christian, therefore, &c. 
 
 "Although it were admitted that the Mahometan religion 
 occupies more territory than the Roman Catholic, yet be- 
 cause it is confined in the Ottoman Empire only, and is not 
 found in other parts of the world, it cannot be called univer- 
 sal in every place and in every people. Besides, they who 
 
182 CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 preach that the religion of Mahomet is so widely diffused, 
 consider it with all its sects : and hence it is right against 
 them thus to consider the religion of Christians ; but if the 
 Christian religion be regarded with all sects, heretics, and 
 schismatics, the number of those who glory in the Christian 
 name will exceed the number of Jews, Mahometans, and 
 idolaters together. 
 
 " Ohj. II. The Jews are scattered over the whole earth, 
 therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. It is true that the Jews are almost every where, 
 but by the dispersion of their nation, not by the propagation 
 of (their) faith : and hence every where wretched and de- 
 spised, they bear about with them the punishment of the 
 blood of the Son of God. Besides, there was no necessity 
 that their religion should be either scattered in every place, 
 or embraced by every nation, like the Christian religion." 
 
 The prophecies of Scripture plainly predict that the Church 
 of Christ is eventually to extend the knowledge of the truth 
 as it is in Jesus over the whole world ; and the Signs of the 
 Times evidently point to this great and glorious consumma- 
 tion as near at hand. The wide diffusion of the principles 
 of the Romish Church is in itself no proof that she is Catho- 
 lic. Infidelity prevails to a fearful extent, and is to be found 
 in every country which has been or now is under the influ- 
 ence of Popery ; but the simple fact of its diffusion is no 
 substantial argument either for or against it. The Bible 
 teaches that truth is eventually to prevail ; the kingdom of 
 darkness is to he finally destroyed, and all the delusions of 
 the Man of Sin are to perish with it ; and the providence of 
 God plainly indicates that " the time of the end " is very 
 near. The wane of Popery throughout Europe, and in al- 
 most every part of the world, except on the continent of 
 America, and the corresponding increase of Protestant influ- 
 ence, show that the days of Popery are numbered. France 
 is already irretrievably lost ; and even Spain is bursting from 
 her shackles ; in Italy the very name of the Pope is execrated, 
 and nothing sustains his throne but the bayonets of Austria j 
 
CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 183 
 
 whilst the great cardinal doctrines of the gospel as taught in 
 the word of God and the Protestant Churches, instead of be- 
 ing confined to sonne few corners of the earth, are daily prov- 
 ing to be the power and wisdom of God to the salvation of 
 multitudes throughout the whole world. The missionaries 
 of Christ are proclaiming salvation through faith in the Re- 
 deemer's blood to the kindreds and nations of the earth, and 
 the mighty angel having the everlasting gospel to preach, is 
 flying through the midst of heaven. Moravians and Metho- 
 dists, Presbyterians and Reformed, are scattering the precious 
 seed of revealed truth stripped of Romish inventions, and 
 however industriously the enemy may sow tares with the 
 wheat, he cannot stay the approach of the harvest. It is 
 ripening amid the snows of Greenland and on the burning 
 sands of Africa ; India and China and the isles of the Sea 
 are stretching forth their hands to God, and we look and 
 long for the dawn of the day when the heathen shall be given 
 to Christ for his inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the 
 earth for his possession. 
 
 Concerning the Mark of the Churchy by which she is 
 called Apostolic, (78.) 
 
 V " The fourth mark is that the true Church is apostolic, 
 concerning which, as Christ says, Matt. xvi. 18 : * Thou art 
 Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church ;' and Matt, 
 xxviii. 20 : * I am with you always, even to the consumma- 
 tion of the world ;' likewise the apostle, Eph. ii. 20 : * Built 
 upon the foundation of the apostles ;' and ch. iv. 1 1 : ' And 
 some, indeed, he gave to be apostles, — and others pastors 
 and teachers ;' and ver. 12 : * for the perfection of the saints, 
 for the work of the ministry, unto the edification of the body 
 of Christ.' 
 
 "For what reason is the Church called apostolic? 
 
 " Aws. 1. On account of the doctrine received from the 
 apostles, the same which our church always has received, 
 and always will receive, so that from the time of thb 
 
 APOSTLES until NOW, IT CANNOT BE SHOWN, IN WHAT RE- 
 
184 CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 SPECT, WHEN, WHERE, AND BY WHOM ANY THING CON- 
 CERNING DOCTRINE HAS BEEN CHANGED. 
 
 " 2. Because it was propagated by the apostles. 
 
 " 3. Because it has a legitimate and uninterrupted succes- 
 sion of bishops, especially in the very seat itself of Peter, 
 concerning which St. Aug. says : * The succession of priests 
 from the very seat of the apostle Peter, to whom the Lora 
 entrusted his sheep to be fed, down to the present Episcopate, 
 keeps me in the church.' 
 
 " 4. Because she adheres inseparably to the chair of St. 
 Peter, or to the Roman See, founded by Peter ; and hence 
 she is called Papal by her enemies, &c. 
 
 " From the mark of the Catholic and Apostolic Church, 
 it will be proper to use the argument of Tertullian in his 
 book concerning Prescriptions, ch. 37, and to accost them 
 in his words : * Who are you 1 When and whence do you 
 come ? The possession is tnine ; I possess it of old, I pos- 
 sess it before (you), I have firm origins from the authors 
 themselves.' And ch. 32. * Let them publish the origins of 
 their churches, let them develope the order of their bishops, 
 running through successions from the beginning, so that the 
 first bishop shall have some author from the apostles or 
 apostolical men.' 
 
 " From these remarks you will gather, that novelty in 
 THE CHURCH IS ODIOUS, and antiquity venerable ; and there- 
 fore that the antiquity of the church is not a sign of debility 
 or defect, but of strength, firmness, and perfection." 
 
 There are several remarks in this section, which are cal- 
 culated to startle by their boldness even those who are pre- 
 pared for the exhibition of no small degree of assurance on 
 the part of Romish writers. There is not a greater farce 
 extant than the pretensions of the Papal Church to apostoli- 
 city, as we hope to show in the course of this chapter. We 
 join issue on the following proposition, " that from the time 
 of the apostles until now, it can not be shown, in what re- 
 spect, when, where, and by whom anything concerning doc- 
 trine has been changed." 
 
 A comparison between the doctrines taught in Paul's 
 
CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 185 
 
 ♦ 
 
 Epistle to the Romans and those now maintained by the 
 
 Church of Rome, and prescribed as articles of faith by the 
 Council of Trent, will suffice to show the impudence and 
 absurdity of her claim to apostolicity. 
 
 1. The Church of Rome represents the Eternal Father, 
 the first person in the Trinity, under the figure of an old 
 man, and teaches that it is proper to bow down to images 
 representing the Deity. Paul condemns it as heathenish 
 idolatry, and as entailing the judgments of God. Rom. i. 
 23—32. 
 
 2. The Church of Rome teaches that the Virgin Mary 
 was without sin. Paul asserts no such doctrine, but on the 
 contrary, affirms, of both Jews and Gentiles, that "all are 
 under sin ;" and that " all have sinned and come short of 
 the glory of God." Rom. iii. 9 and 23. From this charge 
 he exempts no common member of the human family. 
 
 3. The Church of Rome teaches that the « faithful" are 
 justified by works ; Paul, on the contrary, proves that we 
 are justified freely by grace. " For we conclude a man to 
 be justified by faith without the deeds of the law." (Rom. 
 iii. 28.) 
 
 He tells us explicitly that Abraham's faith was counted to 
 him for righteousness, and then adds, " Now, it was not 
 written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him ; but 
 for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on 
 him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead." Whilst 
 he uniformly teaches that good works are the fruit of faith, 
 he as uniformly denies that they can have any share in our 
 justification. 
 
 4. The Church of Rome would have us believe, not only 
 that a man may perfectly fulfil the law, but also do works 
 of supererogation, and thus make Almighty God his debtor, 
 and that a draft upon this fund of merit will always be 
 honoured by Him. Whereas, Paul in all his writings ac- 
 cords with the doctrine taught by the Lord Jesus Christ, that 
 
 16 
 
186 CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 when we have done all things that we are commanded to do, 
 we have done no more than our duty, and are unprofitable 
 servants. 
 
 5. The Church of Rome teaches that holiness consists, in 
 some considerable measure at least, in the observance of 
 festival days of her own appointment, and in abstinence 
 from meats at certain times, under pain of mortal sin. But 
 Paul declares that " the kingdom of God is not meat and 
 DRINK, but righteousness, and peace and joy in the Holy 
 Ghost," Rom. xiv. 17. We commend this whole chapter to 
 the devout attention of those " who command to abstain 
 from meats, which God hath created to be received with 
 thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth." 
 1 Tim. iv. 3. 
 
 6. The Churdh of Rome teaches that the reading of the 
 Scriptures by all classes, is productive of more harm than 
 good ; and that the invariable tendency of this practice is to 
 make men proud, discontented, and conceited. But Paul 
 tells us, that " whatsoever things were written aforetime, were 
 written for our learning, that we through patience and com- 
 fort of the Scriptures might have hope." Rom. xv. 4. 
 
 7. The Church of Rome teaches that the sufferings of the 
 saints upon earth are worthy of eternal glory. Paul affirms 
 that " the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to 
 be compared with the glory that shall be revealed in us." 
 Rom. viii. 18. 
 
 8. The Church of Rome enjoins upon the faithful the wor- 
 'ship of saints and angels, and of the Virgin Mary ; and pre- 
 scribes that the same veneration be paid to the consecrated 
 host which is due to God ; and that divine images, holy relics, 
 &c., are also to be worshipped. Paul inculcates the con- 
 trary, and shows that the judgments of God were inflicted 
 upon the Gentiles on account of their idolatry. (Rom. i.) 
 He never desired the brethren to secure an interest in the 
 prayers of the saints in heaven in his behalf, but he be- 
 
CONCERNING MARKS OF THE CHURCH. 187 
 
 seeches them, " for the Lord Jesus Christ's sake, and for the 
 love of the Spirit, that they strive together with him in their 
 prayers to God for him," &;c. Rom. xv. 30. And yet 
 Peter Dens has the effrontery to assert that, " from the time 
 of the apostles until now, it cannot be shown in what 
 respect, when, where, and by whom, any thing concerning 
 doctrine has been changed ! !" 
 
 With Roman assurance those are challenged who ground 
 their faith upon the word of God alone, and who " build upon 
 the foundation of apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself 
 being the chief corner-stone," " Who are you ? When and 
 whence do you come? The possession is mine ; T possess it 
 of old ; I possess it before you ; I have firm origins from 
 the authors themselves." Now, that the Church of Rome 
 may have " firm origins from the authors themselves," of 
 many of her strange inventions, we are not disposed to dis- 
 pute, but the apostles certainly are not the authors in ques- 
 tion. They never said mass; they never sold indulgences; 
 they never manufactured holy water; they never worshipped 
 images ; they never imposed penances ; they never offered 
 prayers for the souls in purgatory, &c., all which things, 
 and a thousand more equally impious and absurd, are prac- 
 tised in the Romish Church. 
 
 But we are farther challenged. " Let them publish the 
 origins of their churches, let them develope the order of 
 their bishops, running through successions from the begin- 
 ning, so that the first bishop shall have some author from 
 the apostles or apostolical men." Our main concern is 
 whether the doctrines which we receive and preach are those 
 which Christ and his apostles taught ; this we hold to be the 
 true apostolical succession, and this is all the apostolicity 
 which we seek. Yet we cannot but admire the zeal with 
 which Romish priests insist upon their apostolical succession. 
 Although it is notorious that there have been repeated 
 schisms in their church ; that one pope has anathematized 
 
188 CONCERNING MARKS OF TUB CHURCH. 
 
 another, and has in turn been deposed and anathematized by 
 a competitor; though the line of apostolical succession has 
 been entangled and broken by the acts of three rival con- 
 temporary popes, who all cursed each other, and mutually 
 pronounced their ordinations, and all other official acts, in- 
 valid, yet forsooth they can trace the order of their clergy 
 from the present day down to the times of the apostles ! 
 A hiatus of a few centuries is a mere circumstance — and 
 the occasional breach of a century in the chain of apos- 
 tolical succession cannot impair either its continuity or its 
 strength ! 
 
 Besides, when we come to the investigation of the practi- 
 cal benefits to be derived from this boasted succession, what 
 are they ? where are they 1 A Romish bishop professes to 
 confer the gift of the Holy Ghost upon the priest whom he 
 ordains. The mere imposition of the bishop's hands, with 
 the proper intention by virtue of the apostolic succession, 
 imparts the Holy Spirit to the candidate. He rises from his 
 knees duly ordained. But how is it manifest that he has 
 actually received the Holy Spirit? Is he a holier man? 
 Has he become more apt to teach, or has he received a 
 single endowment more than the Presbyterian or Reformed 
 minister, who is set apart by " the laying on of the hands 
 of the presbytery ?" Now, if he has received no additional 
 gifl:, we cannot conceive of what practical benefit the apos- 
 tolic succession has been to him. The very fact that God 
 sets his seal alike to the testimony of all ministers who 
 preach the gospel in its simplicity, is a standing evidence 
 that the residue of the Spirit is with him, and not with the 
 Bishop. 
 
 But we are told in the last paragraph, " Novelty in the 
 Church is odious." So it is. Peter Dens occasionally 
 presents important truths in vigorous language. " Novelty 
 in the Church is odious," and for this very reason we abhor 
 the leading tenets and principles of Popery. 
 
INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 189 
 
 The section which treats of the duration of the Church, 
 we omit, with the general remark, that we hold as a pre- 
 cious truth the doctrine that the Church of Christ has always 
 been preserved, has never been extinct since its foundation, 
 and never will be overthrown, though the gates of hell and 
 of Rome should move against it. 
 
 CHAPTER XXr. 
 Concerning the Infallibilify of the Church. (80.) 
 
 " Is the Church infallible? 
 
 " That the Church in matters of faith and customs can in 
 no respect err, is a doctrine of the faith. It is proved from 
 Malt. xvi. 18. 'The gates of hell shall not prevail against 
 her,' and chap, xxviii. 20. ' Behold I am with you always, 
 even to the end of the world.' 
 
 " Observe against our heretics, that they indeed admit that 
 the Church can not fail ; but then they recur to the invisible : 
 but that the Church is visible, has been already proved. 
 No. 73. Besides, 1 Tim. iii. 15, the apostle says : ' That 
 thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in 
 the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the 
 pillar and ground of the truth;' there, manifestly, the dis- 
 course is concerning the visible church ; for Timothy is not 
 receiving instruction how he ought to behave in a church 
 which he did not see, but which he saw : but now that 
 church is the pillar and ground of the truth ; therefore the 
 visible church is indefectible. 
 
 " Moreover, a twofold infallibility may be considered in 
 the Church : one active and authoritative, which is called 
 infallibility in teaching and defining ; the other passive, or 
 obediental, which is called infallibility in learning and be- 
 hoving. 
 
 " Infallibility, considered in the former mode, beVungs to 
 the church by reason of its head or supreme F^M ^^d the 
 16* 
 
190 INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 prelates of the Church ; although this infallibility does not 
 belong on account of the laity or inferior pastors; for just 
 as a man is said to see, although vision does not pertain to 
 him by reason of all his members, but only by reason of the 
 eyes, so the Church is said to be infallible in this way, al- 
 though this infallibility belongs to her only by reason of the 
 superiors. 
 
 " But if the church be regarded not with reference to her 
 head, but as she embraces all the faithful, even the laity un- 
 der obedience, she ought not thus, properly to be called in- 
 fallible in teaching and defining, because in this respect her 
 office is not to teach, but to learn and believe : wherefore the 
 church considered in this way may either be called passively 
 infallible, or in learning, believing, practising, &c. 
 
 " Hence it cannot be that the Universal Church obeying 
 the Pontiff may believe something as revealed, or may prac- 
 tise any thing as good, which is not such : and hence it is 
 commonly said that the opinion of the Universal Church is 
 always true, and her practice or custom always good." 
 
 Concerning the authority of the Church. (81.) 
 
 " Is the Church the judge of controversies respecting the 
 faith? 
 
 " Ans. The Church, whether assembled or scattered, is an 
 infallible judge of controversies respecting the faith, as is 
 plain from Nos. 68 and 80. It is farther proved (thus) ; if 
 all the pastors of the church scattered over the world could 
 teach any thing false, the Christian people scattered every 
 where would also be bound to admit and believe that which 
 was false; and thus the error of all the pastors would be 
 the error of the whole church ; and so even its passive infal- 
 libility would vanish, which even our adversaries themselves 
 acknowledge. 
 
 " It is proved also from the practice of the church, which 
 although scattered, has condemned many heresies without 
 councils, as Eusebius attests, and St. Augustine teaches, (Bk. 
 4 to Bonifacius, last chap.) ' As if,' says he, ' no heresy has 
 been ever condemned without the assembly of a Synod ; 
 when rather those (heresies) are very rarely found, in order 
 to condemn which such a necessity has existed ; and there are 
 
INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 191 
 
 much and incomparably more which deserved to be disap- 
 proved and condemned there where they have arisen.' 
 
 " To whom does the authority pf judgment in controver- 
 sies respecting the faith belong? 
 
 " Ans. To the Superiors of the Church, namely, to the 
 Bishops, and above all, to the Supreme Pontiff. 
 
 " These Christ means when he says, Matt, xviii. 17 : ' Tell 
 the Church ; but if he hear not the Church,' &c. ; also Luke 
 X. 16: 'He that heareth you heareth me; and he that de- 
 spiseth you despiseth me :' to these also Paul says. Acts xx. 
 28: ' Take heed to yourselves, and to all the flock over 
 which the Holy Ghost hath placed you Bishops, to rule the 
 Church of God.' 
 
 " Does this judgment, in matters of faith, not appertain 
 to theological doctors, or other ecclesiastics ? 
 
 " Ans. No : and hence in general councils they have not 
 a decisive vote : but they are admitted to them only for the 
 examination of subjects and for consultation ; much less 
 therefore are laymen judges in matters of faith. 
 
 " From these things, observe, the government of the 
 c?,arch is indeed monarchical by reason of its head, the 
 Supreme Pontiff, but it is at the same time tempered by an 
 aristocracy : and, because there is likewise a subordination 
 of the ministers of the church among themselves, hence, 
 also, it is a hierarchy. 
 
 "From these remarks it is plain : that this is a vain sub- 
 terfuge of the Quesnellites, who say that the Bull Unigeni!us 
 was not accepted by the bishops assembled in one place : 
 their appeal to a general council is also vain, as the church 
 dispersed is equally infallible, as if assembled in general 
 council, and is the same tribunal. And hence not even that 
 appeal is legitimate according to the principles of the French, 
 who maintain that the pope is fallible and inferior to a gen- 
 eral council : because from an infallible judgment, such as 
 is that of the church dispersed, no appeal is admitted. 
 
 " Is it necessary in order to the unshaken and infallible 
 authority of a definition, that all the bishops throughout the 
 whole world should be of one and the same opinion ? 
 
 " No : but a moral unanimity of the bishops is sufficient, 
 or the greater part of them agreeing with their head, the 
 Supreme Pontiff. 
 
192 INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 " It is proved (thus) : It is the common and received law 
 of all tribunals, that an opinion be pronounced according to 
 the plurality of votes : but here a plurality of votes is obtain- 
 ed of those, who agree with their head, the Supreme Pon- 
 tiff: therefore if a definitive opinion be pronounced by them, 
 this is the legitimate opinion of the tribunal of the whole 
 church. 
 
 " This is confirmed : for otherwise the church would fail 
 and be rendered invisible : for it would not be known to 
 which party it would be right to adhere : but to both parties 
 we could not adhere, as between them the unity of the church 
 could not subsist : nor could it be known which church was 
 the pillar and ground of the truth. 
 
 "Finally that smaller number of bishops dissenting from 
 their head, can not constitute or represent the church. 
 
 "Hence it follows, that in order that it may be known 
 that the whole church has accepted any pontifical bull, it is 
 sufficient that the greatest and the principal part accepts it : 
 but by no means (as the Quesnellites pretend), is it neces- 
 sary that all the bishops of the whole world receive it, in 
 order that the church may be known to receive any doctrine 
 as Catholic, either to propose it, or to condemn the contrary 
 as heretical. 
 
 " This is demonstrated : (thus) otherwise the church would 
 not be able to condemn heresy, when some bishops were 
 infected by it : thus, for instance, the impious doctrines of 
 Arius, Macedonius, Pelagius, &c., couW not be condemned 
 by the church, because they were defended by many bishops : 
 but yet the decrees of the church against said heretics have 
 remained firm and unshaken, and so they are held by the 
 Quesnellites : therefore, it by no means obviates the condem- 
 nation of the Quesnellites that some bishops in France have 
 been refractory against the Bull Unigenitus." 
 
 Of what nature the consent of the Bishops ought to be. (82.) 
 
 " Is the expressed consent of the bishops required in order 
 to the infallible authority of a decision that is passed, or for 
 a definition of the universal church ? 
 
 " No : but a tacit consent is sufficient, bestowed in silence 
 and without demurring, after the decree has passed, which 
 has sufficiently come to the notice of the bishops ; for to bo 
 
INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 193 
 
 silent in this case is to consent : for an error to which no op- 
 position is made, says Felix III. is approved, and truth, when 
 it is not defended, is oppressed. And St. Augustine (epist. 
 119. alias 55 to Januar. chap. 1 9. n. 35,) says : ' the Church 
 of God neither approves nor passes over in silence those 
 things which are contrary to faith and a good life.' 
 
 " It is proved 2d, from the sense and practice of the 
 Church ; for many heresies have been condemned by the 
 Pope alone, without the expressed consent of the bishops, 
 and yet the condemnation of these has been considered as 
 an infallible decree of the Church, and therefore those who 
 dissented have been regarded as heretics : thus, for instance, 
 the condemnation of the errors of Jovinianus, made by Pope 
 Siricius, also the Bulls of Pius V. and Gregory XIII., against 
 the errors of Bajus, are considered as an infallible rule of 
 thinking and speaking, although few bishops have received 
 them by an expressed and public record. 
 
 " Observe, independently of the question concerning the 
 infallibility of the Pope, that it is certain, that, when the 
 Supreme Pontiff defines anything, and a plurality of bishops 
 does not demur, it is not possible that that definition can con- 
 tain any errors, and consequently it cannot favour the Ques- 
 nellites, even if the Bull Unigenitus had not been accepted 
 by an expressed consent of the bishops ; although, at the 
 same time, no pontifical Bull has ever been received in the 
 Church as expressly and solemnly as this. 
 
 " Obj. I. Many opinions of authors are circulated, against 
 which the bishops do not demur ; but yet they are not sup- 
 posed to assent to them, or to approve the same; there- 
 fore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : there is a disparity, because 
 the doctrine of one or of several authors is not published as 
 a decree, but as an opinion ; and this also is sometimes not 
 known by the bishops, nor can it involve the faithful gene- 
 rally in an error. The case is different concerning a Con- 
 stitution of the Supreme Pontiff, pertaining to faith or cus- 
 toms, directed to all the faithful as a niodel and rule to be 
 observed. 
 
 *' Obj. IF. There may be various reasons for the silence 
 of the bishops, v. g., the fear of incurring the indignation 
 of Rome, the fear of the tribunal of the Inquisition, or also 
 
194 INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 the opinion of the pope's infallibility, &c. ; therefore their 
 silence cannot be considered as consent. 
 
 " Ans. Whatever there nnay be of these or similar nno- 
 tives for silence, the inference is denied ; for this always is 
 firm, that the Spirit of Truth never will permit that the 
 church should in any way whatever approve any error in 
 faith or customs, lest the gates of hell might prevail against 
 the church, if silent in such a manner. 
 
 " Wherefore, observe, that the infallibility of the church 
 does not depend upon the question of giving consent from 
 these or similar motives : because infallibility has been given 
 to the church absolutely : not as if the church could proceed 
 in a blind way in her definitions, but when the church defines, 
 it must be undoubted that the pre-requisites also have been 
 afforded. Besides, otherwise, all the definitions of the 
 church might be called into question," &c. 
 
 The 84th section treats of the authority of the church 
 about questions of fact. The main proposition is thus stated. 
 
 " It is to be premised, 2d, that a threefold fact is distin- 
 guished : for one is immediately revealed ; for instance, the 
 incarnation of the Word ; another is merely historical and 
 personal^ and this has respect to the truth of some occur- 
 rence, or the state, condition, inward opinion of the mind, 
 crime or innocence of some person : the other is dogmatical, 
 which attributes some dogma of the faith to some book or 
 person. 
 
 " All acknowledge that the church is infallible in matters 
 immediately revealed. 
 
 " All admit that the church may err in facts purely histo- 
 rical and personal ; and hence it is inferred that when it is 
 asked, whether the judgment of the church concerning pro- 
 positions or books is infallible, the question is not whether 
 the church infallibly decrees that this book is this or that 
 author's, for this kind of fact, the church, which judges 
 concerning books just as they are circulated under the 
 name of a certain author, supposes, but does not deter- 
 mine," &c. 
 
INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 195 
 
 Concerning the infallibility of the Church in the 
 Canonizaton of the Saints. (85.) 
 
 *' What is the canonization of the saints ? 
 
 " Ans. According to present use, it is a solemn judgment 
 of the pope, with the concurrence of the church, concerning 
 the sanctity and the fruition of celestial glory of a departed 
 person with the provision that he be considered by all as 
 such, and be honoured with due veneration. 
 
 " But, Beatification is a permission of the worship of some 
 person deceased, in the communion of the Catholic Church, 
 given only to some particular places, or to a regular order, 
 until his solemn canonization may take place. 
 
 *' And hence. Beatification differs from canonization. 
 
 " 1st. That in Beatification, worship is only regularly per- 
 mitted ; in canonization, worship is decreed by enjoining 
 through a definitive sentence. 
 
 " 2d. Tnat the worship permitted in Beatification is usual- 
 ly confined within particular places, or a religious family ; 
 the worship of a canonized person extends to the whole 
 church. 
 
 *' 3d. And principally, canonization is the decree of the 
 Supreme Pontiff, ultimately definitive, concerning the sanctity 
 of a deceased person : not so Beatification. 
 
 " But because the canonization of the saints is a certain 
 kind of fact, the question is asked, whether in it the church 
 is infallible, or the pope 1 
 
 " Ans. The doctors commonly aflSrm with St. Thomas, 
 &c., because this is a question not simply of fact, but of 
 dogmatical fact : for it has relation to the customs of the 
 whole church, which would thus without remedy be involved 
 entire in a superstitious worship, if at any time, one should 
 be invoked as a saint, who is associated with the damned in 
 hell. 
 
 " Ohj. I. The sanctity of a man depends upon this fact, 
 whether he has died in a state of grace : but this neither the 
 pope nor the church can know. No one short of a divine 
 revelation can know this of any man living : therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : for this is judged from vari- 
 ous signs and miracles, especially after the decease of the 
 person to be canonized, performed by his intercession, with 
 
196 INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 the superadded assistance of the Holy Spirit, which in a 
 matter so grave and affecting the whole church preserves 
 the pope free from error. 
 
 " For the proof, it is to be said that it does not belong to 
 the rule of the church that she should bear testimony con- 
 cerning a man still living, who may also continually fall 
 from holin^s, 
 
 " Ohj. II. In order that any one may be prudently wor- 
 shipped as a saint, moral certainty seems to suffice ; there- 
 fore in this point, the infallibility of the church is not neces- 
 sary. 
 
 " It is proved before : such certainty is sufficient for any 
 one to adore the consecrated host. 
 
 " Ans. There is a disparity, because the worship of Latria 
 exhibited in the adoration of the host, terminates on Christ ; 
 and, although in reality through want of valid consecration 
 he might not be present, he is nevertheless the object of 
 adoration : and therefore it will not be an error oAie object, 
 but of the place: but in the worship of a person, who should 
 not be holy, it would be an error of the object. 
 
 " Is it to be believed with a divine faith that a canonized 
 person is a saint ? 
 
 " Ans. This is not clear. To Silvius, in his controver- 
 sies, and to various other persons, this thing seems not to be 
 in assured confidence ; yet they add that it must nevertheless 
 be firmly held ; so far that to say that the Pope can err in 
 the canonization of Saints, is scandalous, rash, and smack- 
 ing of heresy. Thus also thinks Benedict XIV. lib. 1, con- 
 cerning the canonization of Saints, &c. 
 
 " Is the Church or the Pope infallible in Beatification 1 
 
 *' I answer with Benedict XIV., &c., that when the judg- 
 ment of the Pope, in Beatification, is not ultimately defining 
 or enjoining, but only indulging and permitting, it must not 
 necessarily be infallible ; but it may suffice that it is certain 
 with that moral certainty, by which the Pope acts prudently 
 and wisely, indulges and permits. 
 
 " Whoever wishes more, let him refer to that excellent 
 work of Benedict XIV., filled with every variety of learning, 
 which is inscribed, Concerning the Canonization of the 
 Saints.'''' 
 
INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 197 
 
 The arguments by which Papists attempt to prove the in- 
 fallibility of the Romish Church, are perfectly ridiculous. 
 They tell us that it is impossible that all the pastors of the 
 church should at one and the same time depart from the 
 faith. Why so ? Because they have all received the Holy 
 Spirit, and he is a Spirit of truth. But where is the proof 
 that all her priests have been thus highly favoured 1 Be- 
 cause Christ promised to give the apostles the Holy Spirit, 
 and the priests of the Church of Rome can trace the valid- 
 ity of their ordinations, through a long succession, down to 
 the very apostles themselves ; and because the Saviour has 
 declared " Lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the 
 world," and " the gates of hell shall not prevail against 
 Aer," i. e., the Church. But now, the priests ought to know 
 that these promises belong to the Church of Christ, and not 
 to the Church of Rome. The gates of hell shall never pre- 
 vail against his Church ; and he always will be with his peo- 
 ple to the end of the world ; but these two great and pre- 
 cious truths certainly do not establish the infallibility of the 
 Church of Rome. Christ has never promised his Spirit to 
 Aer, and to the papal apostasy as such he never can give his 
 Spirit. We have already shown that error abounds without 
 limit in the Romish system, and this fact is proof enough 
 that the promises which Christ has given to his Church are 
 misapplied when claimed by the Pope and his priests for 
 themselves, for according to their own theory it is impossi- 
 ble that those should fall into gross errors to whom Christ 
 has given the Spirit of truth. And even supposing that the 
 Romish Church were part of the Church of Christ, which 
 we utterly deny, the texts of Scripture which are adduced 
 establish her infallibility only when she is permitted to beg 
 the question, and assume at once that her interpretations of 
 Scripture must necessarily be correct. She claims to be the 
 judge of controversies respecting the faith ; from her deci- 
 17 
 
198 INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 sion there is to be no appeal, and it is only by her approba- 
 tion and authority that the Scriptures are to be known or 
 received as authentic ! 
 
 The Church of Christ has four special offices relating to 
 the Scriptures. 
 
 1. She is their witness and keeper. If a friend sends a 
 letter to us by the hand of a second person, and he delivers 
 it, we do not credit the contents for the sake of the bearer, 
 but because we recognise the hand and seal of the writer ; 
 neither do we receive the Scriptures as the word of God only 
 or chiefly upon the recommendation of the Church, though 
 conveyed to us by her ministry. 
 
 2. The Church is to preserve and vindicate the Scriptures, 
 to exclude that which is spurious from the genuine word. 
 And to this end the Church is assisted by the Spirit of Christ, 
 through whom she recognises the " voice of the Bridegroom." 
 But the Church does not make the Scriptures genuine, any 
 more than the jeweller makes the gold, whose nature he de- 
 termines by his chemical tests. 
 
 3. The Church is the herald to proclaim the Scripture, 
 and is bound to promulgate it just as she has received it. 
 Now when is a royal edict credited for the sake of the her- 
 ald who proclaims it ? 
 
 4. She is the interpreter of the Scriptures ; she must ex- 
 pound them, without mixing any thing of her own, and ex- 
 plain Scripture by Scripture. 
 
 But without the internal evidence of the Holy Spirit, the 
 testimony of the Church will be of little efficacy. The Scrip- 
 tures are in themselves worthy of belief, and are received by 
 us as the word of God, not only or even principally be- 
 cause the Church so directs, but because they proceed from 
 God. Now that they do thus emanate from God, we know 
 from the testimony of the Holy Ghost, who always makes 
 use of the sacred truths of God's word for the conviction 
 and conversion of sinners. 
 
INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 199 
 
 We know that the Scriptures are divinely inspired. 
 
 1. By the testimony of God speaking in the Scriptures. 
 
 2. By the inward witness of his Spirit. " We have re- 
 ceived the Spirit which is of God, that we might know the 
 things that are freely given us of God." 1 Cor. ii. 12 ; and 
 ver. 15. " He that is spiritual judgeth all things." 
 
 3. By the virtue and power which proceed from every 
 page of the Bible ; by its pure and perfect morals ; by the 
 majesty of its style ; by the awe with which it inspires the 
 conscience ; by the literal fulfilment of its prophecies ; by 
 its admirable preservation ; by the harmony of all its parts ; 
 by the rage with which Satan pursues those who make it 
 their rule of faith and practice ; and by the success which 
 has attended the promulgation of its principles. 
 
 The Scriptures had authority with believers before the 
 judgment of the church, with respect to the canon, had been 
 passed, and consequently the authority of the word of God 
 did not then depend upon her testimony. The judgment of 
 the Fathers is comparatively but of yesterday. If the books 
 which the Fathers and council cite as canonical were not 
 authentic before, then for several centuries there was no au- 
 thentic Scripture at all. 
 
 If the authority of the Church, as it respects us, depends 
 on the testimony of Scripture, then the authority of Scripture 
 does not depend on the voice of the Church. But it is plain 
 that the Church can have no authority, except what is con- 
 ferred by Scripture. If I ask, how am I to be sure that the 
 Church did not err in preparing the canon of Scripture? a 
 Papist will answer: — Because she is guided by the Holy 
 Ghost. But how shall I know that she is so directed ? He 
 replies : — Because Christ has given a promise to that effect. 
 I ask, where? He tells me, in the Scripture, Matt, xxviii. 
 20, &c. " Lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the 
 world." And thus, even the Papist must confess that it is 
 Scripture which gives authority to the Church. 
 
200 INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 There can be no greater or more certain evidence to us 
 than that of a divine testimony ; and such is the voice of 
 Scripture, which is the word of God ; whereas the declara- 
 tion of the Church is but the word of man. If the authority 
 of the Church were paramount, then the truth of all the pro- 
 mises of salvation would stand on the sandy foundation of 
 human judgment, and our faith must ultimately be resolved 
 into the voice of the Church, which would be arrant absurd- 
 ity, and gross impiety. 
 
 As for the presumptuous claim of the Romish Church, that 
 she has the promise of the Holy Spirit to preserve her 
 bishops and pastors from error, we have already remarked 
 that this promise pertains to the Church of Christ. Every 
 pastor, and every private member of that church, who seeks 
 the aid of the Holy Spirit in fervent and believing prayer, 
 shall be guided into all truth necessary for salvation. No 
 man, who in honest simplicity places himself under the 
 guidance of the Blessed Spirit, and asks of God, shall fail to 
 know which doctrine is divine, and what he must do to be 
 saved. " If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, 
 who giveth liberally to all men and upbraideth not, and it 
 shall be given him." James i. 5. 
 
 According to the Romish theory, her bishops, assembled 
 in council, who all have the infallible direction of the Holy 
 Spirit, may nevertheless differ toto coelo in their opinions 
 and decrees ; and the decision of a case depends upon a plu- 
 rality of votes, though all are equally infallible ! Was there 
 ever a more senseless and stupid plea set up in behalf of 
 any absurdity ? 
 
 The contradictory decrees of councils have made the 
 Romtsh claims to infallibility a laughing-stock and a bye- 
 word of reproach. The contests in relation to image-wor- 
 ship alone are sufficient to brand it as a gross imposture. 
 In the fourth century, the Council of Elvira decided against 
 the practice; thus also, in 754, a council at Constantinople 
 
INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 201 
 
 condemned image worship by a formal decree. In 787, the 
 Second Council of Nice declared the former council at Con- 
 stantinople to be illegitimate. In 794, another council re- 
 versed this decree of its predecessor; and its act was con- 
 firmed by another, held in 814; but in 842, image worship 
 was re-enacted. 
 
 As for the pope's infallibility in the canonization of saints, 
 the statement ©f a few facts will be sufficient to show how 
 much dependence is to be placed upon the judgment of his 
 holiness in the manufacture of the gods of Rome. We are 
 struck at once with the resemblance of the canonization of 
 saints to the deification of the heathen. Plutarch tells us 
 that " the ancient priests, in order to the credit of their sys- 
 tem, felt it necessary to persuade the people that certain 
 characters, many of whom had, however, been the most 
 ambitious and sensual of mankind, were honoured by the 
 special favour of heaven ; were deep in its mysteries, and 
 even worthy of being placed among the gods themselves ; 
 in consequence of which their public deification took place, 
 with all the pomp and circumstance so well calculated to 
 impose upon a gross and idolatrous people. In order, how- 
 ever, to this ceremony, some miracu^us intimation of the 
 favour and will of heaven, as to the individual in question, 
 was required to be duly attested as necessary to the cere- 
 mony. Thus, in the case of Romulus, one Julius Procu- 
 lus took a solemn oath, " That Romulus himself appeared 
 to him, and ordered him to inform the senate of his being 
 called up to the assembly of the gods, under the name of 
 Quirinus." In papal as in pagan Rome, the evidence of mira- 
 cles is required, with this difference, however, that in the 
 case of the pope's idols, the miracles are alleged to have 
 been performed by the saints themselves. The matter of 
 procuring the necessary attestations, is a mere trifle ; hence 
 the canonization of saints has become almost as com- 
 mon as the creation of cardinals, and the calendar of the 
 17* 
 
202 INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 saints is continually enriched by the addition of new names. 
 The most common miracle which saints perform after their 
 death, is to impart a delightful perfume to their carcasses ; 
 and it is an especial recommendation if they can preserve it 
 for a long course of years, so that, when their graves are 
 opened, all may be sensible of it. Collin de Plancy, (a 
 French author, who I am sorry to say is . not much ad- 
 mired by Romish priests), in his critical dictionary of miracu- 
 lous relics and images, mentions a large number of wonder- 
 ful miracles, which are duly attested by reverend monks and 
 others, who were eye-witnesses of them, or at least said that 
 they were. I will translate a few paragraphs as specimens. 
 
 " Victoria, a Roman Martyr of the third century. Her 
 body is at Monte Sione, and at Plaisance. She had a third 
 at Paris, in the Convent of the Daughters of God. This 
 third body was sent from Rome, in 1784 : when it was ex- 
 posed, people were surprised to see a saint, who had been 
 dead for so long a time, preserve a fresh colour, and a 
 beautiful skin. Some incredulous persons opened other eyes 
 than those of faith ; and it was ascertained that the Daugh- 
 ters of God, in order to hide from their devotees the hideous 
 spectacle of a skeleton, and to give a better grace to their 
 saintess, had covered ihe head with a mask of silk, and the 
 rest of her bones with a long robe." 
 
 *' ViCTOE, a martyr of Marseilles, in the third century. 
 Whilst the Emperor Maximan Hercules was in this city, 
 Victor overthrew with a kick an altar consecrated to idols. 
 Although he was an officer of the troops of the emperor, he 
 was immediately arrested ; he was tied to the tail of a horse 
 that had never been trained : this punishment did not kill the 
 saint ; he was whipped with cowhides, without seeming to 
 feel it ; he was crucified, without appearing in the least in- 
 commoded. As he sung upon the cross, they put him in 
 prison ; during the night, he converted his jailors, baptized 
 them, and was whipped next day more cruelly that the first 
 time. 
 
 " He was afterwards led before the statue of an idol, to 
 which he again gave a kick. This holy foot was cut off by 
 
INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 203 
 
 order of the tyrants, and Victor walked not a whit less 
 straight for the want of it. They were obliged to put him 
 to death under a millstone. 
 
 "The remains of Saint Victor were honourably interred; 
 they possessed in an eminent degree the virtue of driving 
 away devils. A vast number of blind, deaf, and dumb, is 
 enumerated, whom he cured. 
 
 "At Marseilles there were formerly sold, bottles of holy 
 water in which some bones of Saint Victor had been steeped. 
 It was a sovereign remedy against all sorts of diseases. 
 
 " The body and the head of Saint Victor are at Marseilles ; 
 but he had a second head at Sens, and a third cranium at 
 St. Victor, of Paris. The venerable foot with which Victor 
 overthrew the idols, is also shown in thrs latter abbey. It is 
 said that he has a second body at Rome in the church of 
 Saint Pancrace," (Ssc, &c. 
 
 The evidence of such wonders would certainly constitute 
 some recommendation to a saintship, but unfortunately it is 
 not always that the miracles are so fully attested as in the 
 present instance. I am aware that it is " scandalous and 
 rash," and that it " smacks of heresy" to question the infal- 
 hbility of his holiness in the canonization of saints ; and 
 therefore, in the first instance, I will show merely that the 
 faithful may be deceived. Middleton, in his Letters, makes 
 the following statements. 
 
 " The Spaniards, it seems, have a saint held in great 
 reverence, in some parts of Spain, called Viar ; for the far- 
 ther encouragement of whose worship, they solicited the 
 pope to grant some special indulgences to his altars ; and 
 upon the pope's desiring to be better acquainted first with 
 his character, and the proofs which they had of his saint- 
 ship, they produced a stone with these antique letters, 
 S. VIAR, which the antiquaries readily saw to be a small 
 fragment of some old Roman inscription in memory of one 
 who had been Prefectu s. viARwm, or overseer of the high- 
 ways." ■• 
 
 "We have in England," says Middleton, "an instance 
 still more ridiculous, of a fictitious saintship, in the case of a 
 
INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 certain saint, called Amphibolus, who, according to monkish 
 historians, was bishop of the Isle of Man, and fellow-martyr 
 and disciple of St. Alban ; yet the learned Bishop Usher has 
 given good reason to convince us that he owes the honour 
 of his saintship to a mistaken passage in old acts or legends 
 of St. Alban ; where the Amphibolus, mentioned and since 
 reverenced as a saint and martyr, was nothing more than a 
 cloak which Alban happened to have at the time of his exe- 
 cution ; being a word derived from the Greek, and signifying 
 a rough, shaggy cloak, which ecclesiastical persons usually 
 wore in that age." 
 
 All this, however, does not necessarily affect the pope's 
 infallibility ; because we have not proved that his holiness 
 had really canonized the cloak in question ; but, however 
 loth I am to soil my pages with any thing that is really 
 " scandalous, rash, and smacking of heresy," I may as well 
 say at once that his holiness's infallibility in this respect is 
 at least suspected. The same author to whom I have just 
 referred, says farther : 
 
 " They pretend to show here at Rome, two original im- 
 pressions of our Saviour's face, on two different handker- 
 chiefs ; the one, sent a present by himself to Agbarus, 
 prince of Edessa, who by a letter had desired a picture of 
 him ,• the other, given by him at the time of his execution, 
 to a saint or holy woman, named Veronica, upon a hand- 
 kerchief which she had lent him to wipe his face on that 
 occasion ; both of which handkerchiefs are still preserved, 
 as they affirm, and now kept with much reverence ; the first 
 m St. Sylvester's church, the second in St. Peter's ; where 
 in honour of this sacred relic, there is a fine altar, built by 
 Pope Urban VIII., with a statue of Veronica herself with an 
 inscription. There is a prayer in their book of offices, 
 ordered by the rubric, to be addressed to this sacred and mi- 
 raculous picture, in the following terms ; ' Conduct us, O 
 thou blessed figure ! to our proper home, where we may 
 behold the pure face of Christ.' But notwithstanding the 
 authority of their popes, and this inscription, this Veronica, 
 as one of their best authors has shown, like Amphibolus 
 
INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH. 205 
 
 before mentioned, was not any real person, but the name 
 given to the picture itself by old writers who mention it ; 
 being formed by blundering and confounding the words, 
 VERA Icon, or true image, the title inscribed perhaps, or 
 given originally to the handkerchief by the first contrivers 
 of the imposture. ' Haec Christi imago a recentioribus 
 "Veronicse dicitur : imaginem ipsam veteres Veronicam ap- 
 pellabant,' &c. Mabill. Iter. Ital. p. 88. ' This picture of 
 Christ is called Veronica's by more recent (writers) ; the 
 ancients called the picture itself Veronica.'" 
 
 It is certain that not a few of the saints whom Papists de- 
 voutly invoke, never had any existence at all, and some who 
 4[d live were persons of very doubtful reputation. 
 
 On the 21st of October, they who follow the Romish 
 calender, make mention of St. Ursula and the 11,000 virgins, 
 in these words : — " Permit us, we pray thee, O Lord our 
 God, to venerate with unceasing devotion the triumphs of the 
 holy virgins and martyrs, Ursula and her companions ; &c."* 
 And yet some Romish authors doubt the authenticity of her 
 story ; and well they may. For why so many virgins should 
 ramble away from Cornwall to Rome, without any business, 
 is certainly hard to determine ; and still more difficult is it 
 to say what motive the Huns should have had for putting 
 them all to death. It is said also that Pope Cyriacus went 
 with them, and yet Baronius denies that there ever was a 
 Pope of that name. 
 
 So on July ^7th, some simple souls pray to the Seven 
 Sleepers, and worship them as saints. But any one who can 
 believe that they slept in a cave from the time of Decius to 
 the reign of Theodosius, a period of 362 years, and then, to 
 confute some heretics that denied the resurrection, woke up 
 and looked as fresh as a rose, certainly deserves to be canon- 
 ized as an eighth sleeper. What confirmation the doctrine 
 of the general resurrection could derive from the sleep of 
 
 » See Breviarium Monasticum of Popo Paul V. p. G76. Paris, 1671. 
 
208 ECCLESIASTICAL COUNCILS. 
 
 these seven persons, who it seems were not really dead, of 
 course is not for heretics to conceive. 
 
 St. George is also a renowned saint, and yet his very ex- 
 istence is problematical. St. Christopher, one author tells 
 us, was a gentleman who measured just twelve feet, but an- 
 other veracious historian stretches his stature to twelve cubits 
 that is at least eighteen feet. This tall saint converted 
 just 48,000 Gentiles to Christianity ; and it is further reported 
 of him, that he carried Christ over an arm of the sea on his 
 back. 
 
 On the 15th of March, St. Longinus receives due venera- 
 tion. This is the Roman soldier who pierced the Saviour's 
 side. 
 
 The 29th of March is the day of Marcus Arethusius ; yet 
 Baronius condemns him as an Arian heretic. 
 
 Thomas a Becket, the wicked Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 is invoked in Latin verses to this effect : 
 
 *' By that same blood shed for thee, O Thomas, 
 Christ, raise us to that place to which he has ascended !" 
 
 And yet history represents this saint as a vile traitor to his 
 country. And though we do not justify the manner of his 
 death, all that can be said in his favour is, that he died the 
 Pope's martyr. 
 
 CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 Concerning Ecclesiastical Councils. (86.) 
 
 " What is meant by an ecclesiastical council 1 
 " An assembly of the chief priests or ecclesiastical rulers, 
 convened by legitimate authority, in order that the opinions 
 concerning things pertaining to the church being collected 
 into one, that is, concerning faith, customs, or discipline, it 
 may be determined what is to be thought or done. 
 " How are ecclesiastical councils divided ? 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL COUNCILS. 207 
 
 " They are usually divided into four kinds, viz., into dm- 
 cesan, provincial, national, and general, 
 
 " A DicBcesan is that which the Bishop celebrates with the 
 clergy of his own diocese. 
 
 " A Provincial is that which is celebrated by the Bishops 
 of some ecclesiastical province, their Archbishop or Metro- 
 politan being president. 
 
 " That is called National to which the Archbishops and 
 Bishops of a single kingdom or nation are convoked, the 
 Patriarch or Primate of that nation presiding. 
 
 " A General council is that to which the Bishops of the 
 whole world are assembled, and over which the Pope him- 
 self presides, either in his own person or by his legates : it 
 is called also universal, oecumenical, and also plenary. 
 
 " Among the ancients a national council is sometimes also 
 called plenary and universal ; because it is such as to the 
 kingdom and nation, although it is not absolutely such." 
 
 In order to a general council it is not necessary that all 
 the Bishops should, without exception, be present. Some- 
 times a National is more numerous than a General council. 
 Thus at the first Constantinopolitan council there were not 
 more than 150 Bishops present ; whereas the National Car- 
 thaginian Synod, at which St. Augustine was present, con- 
 sisted of 217 Bishops. 
 
 It is sufficient that it be lawfully assembled out of the 
 whole Christian world. 
 
 " By right. Bishops alone should be called to a General 
 Council, and they are present by divine right as ordinary 
 judges, who, therefore, alone have by right a decisive vote. 
 This is proved from the fact that Christ entrusted to them 
 the government of the church, according to Acts xx. 28 : 
 * Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock over which the 
 Holy Ghost hath placed you Bishops, to rule the Church of 
 God.' 
 
 " Therefore Bishops in councils are as judges, and not 
 only as counsellors of the Pope, and therefore they are ac- 
 customed to use these words, * We decree, we resolve,' &c., 
 and as decreeing they subscribe the council : hence also the 
 things defined in councils are not wont to be called decrees 
 of the Pope but of the council. 
 
 ** Observe, however, that the Supreme Pontiflf is not obliged 
 
208 ECCLESIASTICAL COUNCILS. 
 
 to follow the greater part of the Bishops in delivering his 
 opinion, for although the Bishops are true judges, yet the 
 supreme judgment has been committed by Christ to his vicar 
 upon earth, and has been entrusted to him that he may con- 
 firm and direct his brethren : and thus a king is not obliged 
 to follow the greater part of the judges. 
 
 " Observe, that by privilege, Cardinals who are not Bish- 
 ops, and certain Abbots, and the Chiefs of Regular Orders, 
 may be present at councils as judges, and have a decisive 
 vote," &c. 
 
 From No. 87 we learn that it is the Pope's right to con- 
 voke a general council, to continue and dissolve it, and to 
 preside over it, and approve its proceedings. Whenever Em- 
 perors presided at Oriental councils, their presidency was not 
 authoritative but honorary : they were there merely as fa- 
 vourers, defenders, and witnesses of those things which were 
 done. When they subscribed the decrees of councils, they 
 did it not as decreeing, but as consenting, as witnesses, and 
 as obeying. 
 
 " It also belongs to the Supreme Pontiff to approve gene- 
 ral councils as such, when he is not personally present at 
 them : so that without his approbation, they cannot have the 
 authority of a general council : and therefore we find it re- 
 corded that general councils, and the Council of Trent itself 
 so earnestly sought confirmation from the Apostolic See. 
 
 "If the Pope presides by legates, then, if the legates have 
 instructions from the Pope, concerning questions to be set- 
 tled, and follow them according to the rule in decreeing with 
 the council, then this council appears to be firm and infalli- 
 ble before the Pope's confirmation ; however then, there is 
 in so far need of confirmation, that there may be no dispute 
 concerning the legitimacy of the council, and the consent 
 and approbation of the Supreme Pontiff; but if the legates 
 either have no instruction, or do not follow it, then whatever 
 the council defines is not of infallible authority before the 
 pontifical confirmation. 
 
 " Hence arises another division of councils, by which 
 some are called approved, others reprobated or rejected, some 
 partly approved, partly rejected ; others neither approved nor 
 reprobated." 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL COUNCILS. 209 
 
 Concerning approved General Councils. (88.) 
 
 " The approved general councils from the time of the apos- 
 tles number eighteen. 
 
 " The first is the First Nicene Council, celebrated in the 
 year 325, under St. Sylvester, at which 318 Fathers were 
 present, in which it was definitely settled against Arius and 
 his followers, denying the divinity of the Son, that in divine 
 things, the Son is consubstantial with the Father, &c. 
 
 *' The Sardicensian council under Julius I., which is usu- 
 ally considered as an appendix of the Nicene council, fol- 
 lowed in confirmation of this Synod in the year 347, &c. 
 
 " The second is the First Constantinopolitan, in the year 
 381, assembled under St. Damasus, at which 150 Bishops 
 were present. Gregory Nazianzen, the Prefect of the Con- 
 stantinopolitan Church, presided partly, and partly also Nec- 
 tarius, Gregory's successor, in the Constantinopolitan See. 
 In this, the Nicene faith was confirmed, and the heresy of 
 Macedonius who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit was 
 condemned ; and hence to the Nicene Symbol those things 
 were added in this council, which pertain to the divinity of 
 the Holy Spirit. 
 
 " The third is the Ephesian, in the year 431, held under 
 S. Coelestinus, in which more than 200 Bishops were num- 
 bered ; and Nestorius, the Constantinopolitan Bishop, was 
 condemned, asserting two persons in Christ, a divine and a 
 human, and consequently denying that the divine Virgin is 
 the mother of God. 
 
 "The fourth is the Chalcedonian, oC Q30 Bishops, and 
 convened A. D. 451, under St. Leon, in which Eutyches 
 was condemned, teaching that there was only one nature in 
 Christ combined from a divine and human nature. 
 
 " The fifth is the Second Constantinopolitan, A. D. 553, 
 under Vigilius, celebrated by 255 Bishops, in which the Nes- 
 torian and Eutychian heresies were again condemned with 
 three renowned chapters, and the errors of Origen rejected. 
 " The sixth is the Third Constantinopolitan, under St. 
 Agatho, of 299 Bishops, begun A. D. 680 ; in this the her- 
 esy of the Monothclites was condemned, professing that 
 18 
 
210 ECCLESIASTICAL COUNCILS. 
 
 there was but one will and operation in Christ, and thus re- 
 storing the heresy of Eutyches. 
 
 " The seventh is the Second Nicene, of 350 Bishops, A. 
 D. 787, under Adrian I., celebrated against the Iconoma- 
 chists, or Iconoclasts, i. e., the assailers of the images of 
 Christ and the Saints. 
 
 " The eighth is the Fourth Constantinopolitan, A. D. 869, 
 held under Adrian II., at which 383 Bishops assembled : in 
 this thieir own honour and worship was restored to the sa- 
 cred images, and Photius, a most crafty man, and who had 
 intruded himself into the patriarchate of Constantinople, was 
 deposed ; by his persuasion and influence the Greeks began 
 to assail the primacy of the Supreme Pontiff, and to follow 
 the Latins with deadly hatred, turning many things into ac- 
 cusation against them, and particularly that they taught that 
 the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son, 
 and that they had added the words ' and from the Son' to the 
 Constantinopolitan creed ; and hence that foul schism of the 
 Greeks took its origin. 
 
 " No general councils were afterwards held in the East : 
 the others were celebrated in the West. 
 
 " The ninth general council is the First Lateran, A. D. 
 1123, celebrated under Calixtus II., in order to obviate a 
 grievous dissension between the popes and emperors con- 
 cerning the right of investiture, which concerned the institu- 
 tions of the bishops, chief priests, and those who held bene- 
 fices: this right the emperors arrogated to themselves; but 
 the popes wished this to be reserved to the church. In the 
 same council, provision was made for affording supplies to 
 the holy land and Spain against the Saracens. There were 
 present more than 300 bishops. 
 
 "The tenth is the Second Lateran, A. D. 1139, held 
 under Innocent II., by about 1000 bishops, on the occasion 
 of the schism of Peter Leo, the anti-pope, also against the 
 errors of Peter de Bruis, and Arnold of Brixia, and for the 
 restoration of discipline. But this Peter and Arnold were 
 in error concerning the real presence of Christ in the eucha- 
 rist, and taught that temples and crosses were to be destroy- 
 ed, and that the dead were not helped by prayers. 
 
 "The eleventh is the Third Lateran, A. D. 1179, cele- 
 brated under Alexander III., by 300 bishops, against the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL COUNCILS. 211 
 
 Schismatics ordained by Victor IV., the anti-pope, also, 
 against the Waldenses, who taught that the Supreme Pontiff 
 was not to be obeyed, that swearing was unlawful, that all 
 •were priests, that robbers should not be put to death, &c. 
 
 *' The twelfth is the Fourth Lateran, celebrated in the 
 year 1215, under Innodfent III., against the Abbot Joachim, 
 Almaric of Bena, and the Albigenses, who renewed the 
 errors of the Manichseans. There were present 412 bish- 
 ops, and upwards of 800 abbots and priors, numerous pro- 
 curators of the absent, and legates of a great many princes, 
 for which reason it is usually called the great Lateran 
 Council. 
 
 "The thirteenth is the First Council of Lyons, of 140 
 bishops, in the year 1245, assembled under Innocent IV., 
 against the emperor Frederic, who ruled tyrannically, and 
 who also was deposed. Various measures also concerning 
 the reformation of morals were passed. 
 
 " The fourteenth is the Second Council of Lyons, A. D. 
 1274, held under Gregory X., for the recovery of the holy 
 land, and that the Greeks might be called back to the faith 
 and communion of the Roman Church : peace was agreed 
 upon by the Latins with the Greeks; but was not long kept 
 by the latter. 
 
 " The fifteenth is the Viennensian in France, A. D. 1311, 
 under Clement V., of about 300 bishops, against the errors 
 of the Beguardians, and Beguinians, and Fratrieuli, who 
 taught that man in this life may attain to the highest perfec- 
 tion, so that he may become impeccable, and not be able to 
 advance any farther; and, that, therefore, he should then 
 neither pray nor fast, nor be subjected to any laws. In it, 
 it was also settled that the rational or intellectual soul, is in 
 itself and essentially the form of the human body : the order 
 of the Templars also was abolished. 
 
 " The Council of Constance followed in the year 1414, 
 in order to abolish a schism which had long troubled the 
 church, several claiming to be Pope; also against the errors 
 of Wicklif and John Huss, who tauo;ht that all things hap- 
 pen by fatality, that the church consists of the predestinated 
 only, that no one is Lord, Prelate, or Bishop, while he is in 
 mortal sin, &c. It was dissolved under Martin V., elected in 
 this same council. The French reckon this council among 
 
212 ECCLESIASTICAL COUNCILS. 
 
 the oecumenical, but others admit it only as to the last ses- 
 sions, and as to those actions against the errors of Wicklif 
 and others, which the same Martin V. approved. 
 
 " The sixteenth is the Florentine, commenced at Ferra- 
 ra, A. D. 1438, under Eugenius IV., but transferred to Flo- 
 rence on account of the plague, and there dissolved, A. D. 
 1439 ; in it the Greeks agreed with the Latins concerning 
 the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the 
 Son, concerning purgatory, concerning the Supremacy of 
 the Roman Pontiff over the whole earth, concerning the Eu- 
 charist, that it may be prepared equally with unleavened and 
 fermented bread, and concerning various rites. The union 
 of the Armenians with the Roman Church followed the re- 
 conciliation of the Greeks with the Latins, (which, however, 
 did not last long ;) who (the Armenians) received from Eu- 
 gene IV. letters of union, containing in a compendium the 
 Catholic doctrine. 
 
 " The Seventeenth is the Fifth Lateran, commenced in 
 the year 1512, under Julius II. and Leo X., of 114 Bishops, 
 against the Conventicle of Pisa, and for the reformation of 
 morals ; in this it was settled that the rational soul 
 
 IS IMMORTAL. 
 
 " The eighteenth is the Council of Trent, commenced 
 Dec. 13, A. D. 1545, under Paul III. ; on account of a pes- 
 tilence affecting the city of Trent, it was transferred to Bo- 
 nonia ; afterwards it was brought back to Trent ; on account 
 of threatening wars, it was again interrupted ; finally, on the 
 4th day of December, A. D., 1563, it was dissolved under 
 Pius IV. ; 255 Fathers subscribed. This council was cele- 
 brated especially against the errors of the Lutherans, Cal- 
 vinists, and other heretics, at that time rampant." 
 
 Concerning the authority of Councils, (89.) 
 
 " May ecclesiastical councils err? 
 
 "All admit that particular councils, or such as are not 
 general, may err; yet even they themselves have seldom 
 erred, if their great number is considered, and if reference is 
 made to councils of Catholic Bishops. 
 
 " If a particular council, in which heresies are condemned, 
 is approved by the Supreme Pontiff for the whole church, it 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL COUNCILS. 213 
 
 obtains infallible authority in the faith, founded indeed on the 
 infallibility of the Pope himself; and thus the Roman See 
 has approved two African provincial councils, the Milevitian 
 and Carthaginian, against Pelagius and Celestius ; and hence 
 St. Augustine, in discourse 131, concerning the words of the 
 apostle, judged that the matter against the Pelagians was al- 
 together concluded, saying ' Answers have come from Rome, 
 the question has been decided, would that an end might some- 
 time be put to error !' 
 
 "In our day, says Benedict XIV, bk. 13, concerning the 
 diocese, synod, ch. 3. (vol. 3, p. 287 and 290, Mechlin edit.) 
 in particular councils, questions of faith are not wont to be 
 discussed, but decrees are passed, relating merely to discip- 
 line ; yet it happens sometimes, that these also are approved 
 by the Apostolic See ; and hence it might be doubted whe- 
 ther from this confirmation, they acquire the power of oblig- 
 ing the whole church? To which the same Pontiff replies, 
 that confirmation, indeed, adds strength to these confirmed 
 decrees, but that they by no means extend to other dioceses, 
 unless the Pope has otherwise expressed : hence the Provin- 
 cial Synod of Mechlin, in the year 1607, although confirmed 
 by Paul V. does not transcend the limits of the province. 
 
 " Can general councils err ? 
 
 " General councils, without the confirmation or approba- 
 tion of the Roman Pontiff, are fallible, and have frequently 
 erred, as is plain in the Ariminensian, Second Ephesian, &c. 
 because thus they do not represent the Church, but a body 
 without head, to which Christ has not promised infallibility. 
 
 " But if the assent and confirmation of the Pope is afforded 
 only to some decrees of the council, then they alone will 
 have plenary authority ; as was done in the case of the 
 decrees of the Council of Constance. 
 
 " Yet the promises of Christ, made to the Church, appear 
 on the whole to require that a general council, held when 
 the Pope is dead or doubtful, may have passive infallibility, 
 or guard the faith and customs, and not define anything 
 contrary. 
 
 " That general councils, approved by the Supreme Pontiff, 
 cannot err in defining matters of faith and customs, is cer- 
 tain as a matter of faith ; and hence they are immediately 
 regarded as manifest heretics, who presume to call in ques- 
 18* 
 
214 ECCLESIASTICAL COUNCILS. 
 
 tion any things decreed by such councils : hence St. Gregory, 
 bk. I. epist. 24, says ' that he received and venerated 
 
 THE first four COUNCILS JUST AS THE BOOKS OF THE 
 HOLY GOSPEL.' 
 
 " This infallibility is proved by No. 80, from which it is 
 plain that the Church is infallible in matters of faith and cus- 
 toms : but a general council represents the whole Church, 
 therefore, &:c. Hence the statutes of a general council are 
 said to be from the Holy Spirit, according to Acts xv. 28. 
 
 * It HATH SEEMED GOOD TO THE HoLY GhOST AND TO US.' 
 
 Moreover, if a general council, approved by the Pope, has 
 not infallible authority, it would follow that there is not a 
 certain and undisputed authority in the Church for settling 
 controversies ; which is against No. 69. 
 
 " Ohj. St. Augustine, bk. 2, concerning baptism against 
 the Donatists, chap. 5, says that the former plenary councils 
 themselves, are frequently amended by later ones ; but that 
 which may be amended is not infallible ; therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. Several answers to this passage may be given : 
 
 "1. That St. Augustine is speaking of plenary councils 
 in general, as well of those not approved, as of the approved : 
 and thus" it can happen that the former, which had not been 
 approved, and contained errors, may be amended by later 
 approved (councils). 
 
 " 2. St. Augustine appears not to speak concerning gene- 
 ral councils properly, but improperly, just as national coun- 
 cils are called general, and as he calls the Hyponeusian 
 Synod plenary. 
 
 " 3. If it be understood concerning councils truly oecu- 
 menical, it must be said that St. Augustine only means, that 
 the former may be amended by subsequent ones in simple 
 facts, and in those things which relate to discipline, ceremo- 
 nies, and other ecclesiastical customs ; and hence he subjoins 
 to the same passage: 'As in the course of experience that 
 which had been hidden is opened, and that which was con- 
 cealed becomes known ;' but these things which belong to 
 the faith, are known not by experience, but by the Word of 
 God written or handed down. 
 
 " Yet do not infer from this that it can happen that the 
 church may introduce or approve a general discipline that 
 may be hurtful to the salvation of her own. In the apos- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL COUNCILS. 215 
 
 tolical decree already cited, abstinence from blood and things 
 strangled, was a mere point of discipline, and indeed not to 
 be of long duration ; and yet, in enjoining it, the apostles 
 say : * It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us :' 
 by which words they sufficiently intimate that the church, 
 in sanctioning general discipline, has the Holy Spirit as pre- 
 sident and assistant. Therefore, although the reason of 
 acting is various, yet it is always wisely accommodated to 
 the various circumstances of times and persons. 
 
 " 4. Finally, certain subsequent councils, define more 
 clearly some things which were not yet sufficiently settled 
 in former ones ; and thus the former councils are elucidated 
 by subsequent ones. 
 
 " It is here to be observed with Estuis, in Bk. 2, &c., ♦ Not 
 all things which are said in any way whatever in the decrees 
 of councils, are to be considered as settled ; but those things 
 only to which the intention of the persons resolving and de- 
 fining is properly directed. But this is known from the 
 circumstances of the case, and from the causes or occasions 
 of framing the decrees. 
 
 " Melchior Canus gives the following rules, by which a 
 definition of a council pertaining to the faith may be discri- 
 minated, Bk. 5. de locis theol. ch. v. 9, 4. 
 
 " 1. The first is, if those who assert the contrary are con- 
 sidered heretics. 
 
 " 2. When the Synod prescribes decrees in this form, * If 
 any one shall think so and so, let him be accursed.' 
 
 " 3. If sentence of excommunication is passed by the law 
 itself against those who shall contradict. 
 
 " 4. If it is said that any thing is to be firmly believed, ex- 
 pressly and properly, by the faithful ; or is to be received as 
 a doctrine of the Catholic faith, or, in other similar words, 
 that any thing is contrary to the gospel, or the doctrine of 
 the apostles. But it must be said, not as opinion, but as a 
 certain and firm decree." 
 
 I presume my readers will excuse me for not offering an 
 elaborate refutation of the infallibility of the general coun- 
 cils of the Romish Church. They were composed of frail 
 
216 ECCLESIASTICAL COUNCILS. 
 
 and fallible men, as was but too often signally manifest in the 
 intrigues and animosities by which they were marked, and 
 in the preposterous absurdities, which were defined and 
 decreed as the results of infallible deliberations and disputes. 
 
 Not a few of these councils, so far from being assemblies 
 of pious and learned divines, were mere cabals ; the majority 
 of which were quarrelsome, fanatical, domineering and dis- 
 honest prelates, who, as Dr. Jortin says, " wanted to compel 
 men to approve all their opinions of which they themselves 
 had no clear conceptions, and to anathematize and oppress 
 those, who would not implicitly submit to their determi- 
 nations." 
 
 The audacious attempt to make the statutes of such coun- 
 cils equivalent in authority to the precepts of the Word of 
 God, and the impious assertion that these quarrelsome cabals 
 were directed in their deliberations by the Spirit of God, so 
 that they might properly say in the language of the apostles, 
 *' it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us," are no- 
 thing short of rank blasphemy ! 
 
 To the faithful, it would no doubt be consolatory to know 
 that in the sixteenth century, the immortality of the rational 
 soul was definitely settled^ by the Fifth Lateran Council, 
 were it not, that they, alas ! expect their immortality to be 
 verified and almost eked out in purgatory. 
 
 For a succinct vindication of the doctrines and practice of 
 the Waldenses, and a narrative of their persecutions and 
 sufi*erings, I refer my readers to a little work by Dr. Brown- 
 lie, recently published at the office of the Protestant Refor- 
 mation Society of New York. 
 
CONCERNING THE SUPREME PONTIFF. 217 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 Concerning the Supreme Pontiff. (90.) 4 
 
 " What is the Supreme Pontiff? 
 
 " He is Christ's Vicar upon earth, and the visible head of 
 his church. 
 
 " Christ instituted the church of the New Testament upon 
 earth, not on the plan of an aristocratic or democratic go- 
 vernment, but on the plan of a monarchical government, yet 
 tempered by that which is best in an aristocracy, as was said 
 No. 81. 
 
 " But when Christ was about to withdraw his visible pre- 
 sence by his ascension into heaven, he constituted his Vicar 
 the visible head of the church, he himself remaining the 
 supreme, essential and visible head. 
 
 " Who is called Supreme Pontiff, and wherefore ? 
 
 " The Roman Pontiff, not only because he holds the high- 
 est honour and dignity in the church, but principally, because 
 he has supreme and universal authority, power and jurisdic- 
 tion over all bishops and the whole church. 
 
 " He is also called the pope, which word signifies either 
 father, or by antonomasia the father of fathers ; also the 
 Chief Priest of the Apostolic See ; so that the Roman See 
 by way of eminence is called without any addition the Apos- 
 tolic See." 
 
 Concerning the Supremacy of Peter. (91.) 
 
 "As heretics can not only deny the superiority of present 
 popes, but also the supremacy of the apostle Peter himself, 
 therefore this must be asserted against them. 
 
 " I. But it is proved that Peter received supremacy from 
 Christ above the other apostles, from Matt. xvi. 18., where 
 the supremacy is promised, and John, ch. xxi., where it is 
 conferred. 
 
 "Christ says. Matt. xvi. 18: * thou art Peter, and upon 
 this rock I will build my church, v. 19., and I will give to 
 thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven ; and whatsoever 
 
218 CONCERNING THE SUPREME PONTIFF. 
 
 thou shalt bind upon earth,' &c. Here although the name 
 of supremacy is not expressed ; yet it is manifestly promised 
 under two metaphors : the former metaphor is taken from 
 the plan of a foundation and a building : but what the foun- 
 dation is in a building, this the superior is in a community, 
 the king in a kingdom, &c. : the other is borrowed from the 
 delivery of keys : for he to whom the keys of a city are 
 delivered is constituted or declared king or governor of the 
 city. Add to this, the interpretation and authority of the 
 Holy Fathers, as may be seen in Bellarmine, Sylvius, 
 Tournely, &c. 
 
 " Calvin objects : that by the word, rock, upon which it is 
 said the church shall be built, is to be understood not Peter 
 but Christ, and therefore the Evangelist changes the term, 
 and afterwards said, * Thou art Peter,' by saying ' not upon 
 this Peter,'' but ' upon this roch.'' 
 
 " Ans. I deny the antecedent : how foolish this observa- 
 tion of Calvin is, is plain from the Syriac, which idiom 
 Christ used, in which the difference of gender is not found, 
 which is in the Latin and Greek : and hence Christ said 
 with one and the same word : * Thou art Cephas, and upon 
 this Cephas,' which in Latin should be rendered, < thou art 
 a rock, and upon this rock ;' but the Latin translator ren- 
 ders, ' Thou art Peter,' in the masculine, because the remark 
 was made concerning a man, having followed the rule of the 
 Greeks, among whom the word Petra received a masculine 
 and feminine termination, {rrk^og, m. and crsV^a, f.,) which 
 the Latin word, Petra, does not receive ; therefore when 
 Christ says, upon this rock, the pronoun this manifestly re- 
 fers to the rock, concerning which mention was just made ; 
 but immediately before, Christ had called not himself but 
 Peter the rock ; therefore, &c. 
 
 *' Hence the mystery of the change of the name Simon into 
 Peter, or a rock, John i. 42. Besides, if these words, * upon 
 this rock,' should be referred to Christ and not to Peter, 
 Christ would in vain have said to Peter ; ' I tell thee because 
 thou art Peter ;' nor ought he to have said, I will build, but 
 I have built, or I build. - 
 
 "You will urge, St. Aug. in the last treatise upon John, 
 by this rock understands Christ. It is confirmed by his opin- 
 ion, Bk. I. Retract, chap, xxi., where he says ; * For it was 
 
CONCERNING THE SUPREME PONTIFF. 219 
 
 not said to him, thou art a rock, ^ut thou art Peter ; but 
 Christ was the rock.' 
 
 " Ans. St. Augustine formerly proposed this interpreta- 
 tion, pleading against the Donatists, who deduced the power 
 and efficacy of the Sacraments from the holiness of the min- 
 ister, and hence he preferred placing this foundation in Christ 
 rather than in Peter, lest the Donatists might thence have 
 deduced a confirmation of their error. Yet he admitted our 
 interpretation, which is the common one ; indeed in the pas- 
 sage adduced, mentioning both he subjoins : ' Of these two 
 opinions, let the reader choose that which is the more pro- 
 bable.' 
 
 " This doubt of St. Aug. arose from ignorance of the He- 
 brew or Syriac and of the Greek ; to those skilled in which, 
 it is known that the phrase * Thou art Cephas,' is the same 
 as *Thou art a rock.' 
 
 " You may rejoin : Christ alone is the foundation of the 
 Church, according to that 1 Cor. iii. 11. ' For no one can lay 
 another foundation but that which is laid, which is Christ 
 Jesus ;' therefore, by this rock Peter is not meant, but Christ. 
 
 *' Ans. I deny the antecedent : Christ alone is indeed 
 the essential and primary foundation which consists in itself 
 and depends on no other, but sustaining all those things 
 which belong to the building of the church, and, therefore, 
 Peter himself: yet it is consistent with this that Peter is the 
 secondary foundation, founded on Christ by the virtue and 
 authority received from himself 
 
 " The Lutherans object : by the rock upon which the 
 Church is said to be built, Peter is not meant, but the faith 
 or confession of Peter. They confirm it from St. Chrysos- 
 tom, St. Ambrose, St. Hilary, &c. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the antecedent : for it is plain from what 
 has been said, that the person of Peter ought to be under- 
 stood, which the following words, ' I will give to thee the 
 keys of the kingdom of heaven,' evidently show. 
 
 *' To the confirmation from the Holy Fathers, it must be 
 said, that they sometimes speak thus in a causal sense ; be- 
 cause, indeed, Peter confessing the divinity of Christ, ob- 
 tained for the sake of the merit of his faith, that he should 
 be the foundation of the Church. 
 
 "Besides, those saints do not mean that the Church is 
 
220 CONCERNING THE SUPREME PONTIFF. 
 
 founded upon the faith in itself considered, without relation 
 to the person of Peter, but upon his personal faith, which is 
 the same as upon the person itself of Peter having faith : 
 and hence, when they say, that the Church is founded upon 
 the faith of Peter, or that Peter's faith, or confession of failh^ 
 is the foundation of the Church, they nnean it in this sense, 
 that Peter by reason of his own indefectible faith, indefectibly 
 sustains and confirms all in it. 
 
 " Against the argument deduced from the delivery of the 
 keys, the heretics object : the keys are promised immediately 
 to the Church, and not to the person of Peter. 
 
 " The antecedent is proved from St. Augustine, treatise 50 
 upon John, where he says thus, ' Peter, when he received 
 the keys, signified Holy Church ;' therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the antecedent : for it is evident that from 
 what was before said, it is clear that the remark was directed 
 to the person of Peter. 
 
 " As for St. Augustine and the other fathers, it must be 
 said that they only mean that Peter did not receive the keys 
 as a private person, but on the condition of the Supreme 
 Pastor, and for the advantage of the Church, from whom, 
 by ordinary right, the power of the keys was to be conferred 
 upon the other superiors of the Church, the bishops and 
 pastors. 
 
 " Add to this, that the fathers do not always quote Sacred 
 Scripture in the literal sense, but often in the mystic sense, 
 and sometimes in the accommodatory sense. 
 
 *' Ohj. The same which is promised to Peter, Matt. xvi. 
 19. * I will give thee the keys,' &c. is promised to the other 
 apostles. Matt, xviii. 18. * Whatever ye shall bind upon 
 earth,' &c. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the antecedent : for the power of the keys 
 promised to Peter alone. Matt, xvi., and given, John xxi., is 
 something greater and better than the power of binding and 
 loosing, which is only an inadequate act of the keys. 
 
 " Observe, although the other apostles received the power 
 of preaching everywhere, and founding churches, and thus 
 a certain universal jurisdiction through universality of place, 
 that this, although such, was still only extraordinary, and 
 with subjection to Peter, and to become extinct with them- 
 selves ; hence the proposition which placed St. Peter and St. 
 
CONCERNING THE SUPREME PONTIFF. 221 
 
 Paul as the two-fojd head of the church, was justly con- 
 demned as heretical by Innocent X. 
 
 " Prove that the primacy of Peter is gathered through 
 those words, John xxi. 17, ' Feed my sheep !' 
 
 " II. Because, by these words, under a metaphor deduced 
 from the pastor of sheep, the office of pastor and ruler 
 of the universal church is enjoined upon Peter, &c., there- 
 fore the power is conceded to the whole church. It is 
 proved : because to feed signifies not only to teach, but also 
 to have authority and to rule : just as it belongs to a pastor 
 of sheep, not only to afford food, but also to conduct and 
 bring back, to defend and restrain. 
 
 " By ' my lambs — my sheep,' is signified the universality 
 of Christ's faithful, for the pronoun my is equivalent to a 
 universal sign, as Christ speaks indefinitely and all the 
 faithful are Christ's sheep or lambs. 
 
 "The heretics object: it was not said to Peter alone: 
 
 * Feed my sheep,' therefore, &c. 
 
 "They prove the antecedent from St. Augustine, Book 
 concerning the Christian Combat, chap, xxx, where he says, 
 *When it is said to him (to Peter), it is said to all : Lovest 
 thou me? Feed my sheep.' 
 
 " I deny the antecedent : because circumstances show 
 that those words were spoken to Peter alone : for Christ ad- 
 dresses Peter alone, accosting him by his proper name, 
 
 * Simon, son of Jonas ;' so that indeed others are excluded by 
 these words : ' Lovest thou me more than these V 
 
 " As for St. Augustine we reply, that it may be said to all 
 other superiors of the church, ' Feed my sheep,' in so far, 
 namely, as the part of the flock which was committed to 
 them is concerned ; or according to the accommodatory 
 sense, inasmuch as they ought to imitate the model of Peter 
 in feeding and governing. 
 
 " III. The third argument in order to prove Peter's su- 
 premacy from Sacred Scripture can be borrowed from 
 various prerogatives, with which Peter was endowed before 
 the other apostles. 
 
 " The first prerogative is the change of name : * Thou 
 shalt be called Cephas.' John i. 42. 
 
 " The second is, that in the order of the enumeration of 
 the apostles, Peter is always named in the first place by the 
 19 
 
222 CONCERNING THE SUPREME PONTIFF. 
 
 Evangelists, notwithstanding the change of the order of the 
 others. Thus it is expressly said, Matt. x. 2., ' The first 
 Simon, who is called Peter.' 
 
 " The third, tribute is paid for Christ and Peter. Matt, 
 xvii. 26. 
 
 *' The fourth, Peter alone walks with Christ upon the wa- 
 ter. Matt. xiv. 29. 
 
 " The fifth, Christ says specially to Peter. Luke ch. xxii. 
 32. * I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not ; and thou 
 being once converted, confirm thy brethren.' 
 
 "The sixth, P-eter, Acts i. 15, proposes and teaches that 
 a new apostle must be chosen in the place of Judas ; Acts ii. 
 14, afler the Holy Spirit had been received, he first promul- 
 gates the gospel ; Acts iii. 6, -he does the first miracle in 
 proof of the faith ; Acts x. 28, he first begins to preach to 
 the Gentiles ; Acts xii. 5, for Peter prayer was made with- 
 out intermission by the church ; Acts xv. 7, he speaks first 
 ' as though president of the council at Jerusalem, and all fol- 
 low his opinion. These and other prerogatives, with the in- 
 terpretations of the Holy Fathers, Bellarmine rightly deduces, 
 Bk. I., concerning the Roman Pontiff. 
 
 " Against these, the heretics again object, I. Paul say- 
 ing. Gal. ii. 7 : ' To me was committed the gospel of the un- 
 circumcision, as to Peter was that of the circumcision,' sig- 
 nifies that he is the apostle of the Gentiles, as Peter of the 
 Jews ; therefore jurisdiction was divided between them. 
 
 " Arts. I deny the inference : for that was a division, not 
 of jurisdiction, but of nations, in order to the work of preach- 
 ing; viz., that as Peter had been principally destined for 
 preaching to the Jews, so Paul had been specially destined 
 by Christ for preaching to the Gentiles. 
 
 "They object II. Paul in the same place, v. 11, resists 
 Peter to his face, therefore he was not subject to him. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : because Paul does not blame 
 Peter by authority as a superior, an inferior, but by fraternal 
 reproof, which is sometimes lawful for an inferior with re- 
 spect to a superior. Some maintain that Cephas, concern- 
 ing whom Paul there speaks, was not Peter, hut another 
 disciple. Kerkherdere may be consulted concerning the 
 reproved Cephas. 
 
 " They object III. If Peter was the head of the church, 
 
CONCERNING THE SUPREME PONTIFF. 223 
 
 the church must perish at the deatli of Peter ; for the head 
 dying, the body dies. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : for that the body separated 
 from the head must die, is true of that head from which the 
 members derive sense and motion : but Peter was not thus 
 the head of the church, but Christ : but it is not true con- 
 cerning the head of which the loss is merely external ac- 
 cording to external government ; such was Peter, and such 
 are his successors ; for when the Pope dies, Christ the in- 
 visible head remains, from whom the church derives life and 
 sense, and is prepared to receive another visible head." 
 
 If the doctrine of Peter^s supremacy were taught in the 
 word of God, it would still be incumbent upon Papists to 
 show by incontestible evidence, that Peter was bishop of 
 Rome, and that he had divine authority to invest all his suc- 
 cessors in that See with pre-eminence over all their brethren. 
 If the proof fails in any one of these three points, the rock 
 upon which popery is built is broken, and the whole fabric 
 falls into ruins. Against the foregoing arguments, we offer 
 the following as our reasons for disbelieving the first propo- 
 sition, viz., that Peter was invested with supremacy. 
 
 1. If such authority was really conferred upon Peter, the 
 Evangelists who by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit re- 
 corded all things necessary for faith and salvation would 
 have mentioned it in plain and unequivocal language. But 
 do they ever say that one of the apostles was to have and 
 to claim authority over all the rest? If so, when and where? 
 Dcr they not on the contrary explicitly affirm that equal au- 
 thority was given to all the apostles? John xx. 23. When 
 the question who should be greatest was started among them, 
 there is no mention made of any preference given by Christ 
 to Peter; but the Saviour evidently condemns the lust of 
 power, and says, " ye know that they which are accounted 
 to rule over the gentiles exercise lordship over them ; and 
 their great ones exercise authority upon them. But so 
 8hall.it not be among you ; but whosoever will be grea* 
 
224 CONCERNING THE SUPREME PONTIFF. 
 
 among you shall be your minister, (or servant.) Mark x. 
 42, 43. On another occasion he said to his disciples, " Be 
 not ye called Rabbi, for one is your Master, even Christ, 
 and all ye are brethren." (Matt. xxii. 8, 9.) Could there 
 have been a plainer intimation of the equality of the 
 apostles ? 
 
 2. When the Apostle Paul enumerates the various orders 
 in the churches, he says, " God hath set some in the church, 
 firsts APOSTLES ; secondly, prophets ; thirdly, teachers ; after 
 that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, di- 
 versities of tongues." (1 Cor. xii. 28.) Strange omission ! 
 Not one word of Christ's Vicar ! First apostles, not first, 
 Peter ! 
 
 3. If Peter had really possessed the supremacy ascribed 
 to him, how could Paul have said, (2 Cor. xi. 5.) "I was 
 not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles ?" What ? Not 
 a whit behind Peter 1 
 
 4. It is natural to suppose that if Peter had been the ac- 
 knowledged chief of the apostles, he would have been called 
 upon to decide controversies, but this was never the case. 
 In the debate between Paul and Barnabas and others, about 
 circumcision, they referred the point, not to Peter, but to the 
 Church, and the apostles and elders at Jerusalem. The 
 conclusion to which they arrived was recorded, not as the 
 decree of Peter, (for he did not even preside,) but as that 
 which " seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us," i. e. to 
 the apostles, elders, and brethren, who met at Jerusalem ion 
 that occasion, (Acts xv. 2 — 29.) 
 
 5. Paul would not have had occasion to withstand Peter 
 to his face, had his erring brother been infallible ; and if he 
 had possessed the supremacy ascribed to him by the Church 
 of Rome, it would scarcely have been decorous in Paul to 
 expose the failing of his superior. Neither can this be re- 
 garded as an ordinary fraternal reproof, (as Peter Dens inti- 
 mates,) because that is to be administered privately, as a re- 
 
CONCERNING THE SUPREME PONTIFF. 225 
 
 ference to Matt, xviii. will show. Nor will Kerkherdere, to 
 whom we are referred, extricate Romanists from this diffi- 
 culty, by suggesting that the " Cephas, concerning whom 
 Paul there speaks, was not Peter, but another disciple." The 
 connexion shows it could be no other than the infallible 
 apostle himself. Besides, if it had been another disciple, it 
 would have been an unpardonable omission in the sacred 
 writer, had he neglected to state the fact in emphatic language. 
 There were two of our Lord's twelve disciples, who were 
 called Judas, but the evangelists are careful in distinguishing 
 between them. Hence we read of " Judas Iscariot," and 
 Judas (" not Iscariot,") and if anything disparaging was to 
 be mentioned, which affected another disciple of the same 
 name as Peter, and not the apostle himself, in common jus- 
 tice it would have been stated. 
 
 6. Again ; we find the apostles sending Peter as their 
 messenger, in company with John, (Acts viii. 14 ;) if he had 
 been Pope among the apostles, he would have sent them. 
 Would not his Holiness marvel greatly if his Bishops should 
 send him on a missionary tour with one of their own num- 
 ber? 
 
 7. If Peter had possessed the supremacy ascribed to him, 
 is it probable that he would have been accosted by his bre- 
 thren as we read in Acts xi. 1 — 4? Would he have defer- 
 red to the judgment of private brethren so far as to vindi- 
 cate himself before them 1 The brethren did not bow down 
 reverently and kiss the apostle's sandal, and address him 
 with the blasphemous title which Romish writers have con- 
 ferred upon theic PontitT — " Dominus Deus noster, Papa" — 
 " Our Lord God, the Pope !" 
 
 8. In short, if Peter had been appointed by Christ as his 
 vicar upon earth ; had he been clothed with supreme author- 
 ity, he would certainly have been called upon to exercise it, 
 and his decisions ex cathedra would as certainly have been 
 recorded. But he never claimed this authority, either whpn 
 
 19* 
 
220 CONCERNING THE SUPREME PONTIFF. 
 
 present with the churches or in his epistles ; he claims no 
 more than an equality with his brethren, the apostles, and 
 pastors of the church ; " The elders who are among you I 
 exhort, whom am also an elder." The language of Paul is 
 far more authoritative than Ihat of Peter, 1 Cor. vii. 10 ; 1 
 Tim. V. 14. 21. Peter, at the close of his first epistle, (v. 
 1 — 3.) warns those in authority against being " lords over 
 God's heritage," — as though he had been divinely directed 
 himself to confound the claims of Anti-Christ. 
 
 But there are a number of special prerogatives ascribed 
 to Peter by the evangelists. 
 
 The first is the change of name, " Thou shalt be called 
 Cephas ;" John i. 42. We must admit this prerogative^ 
 and we do it cheerfully — but what then 1 Therefore Peter is 
 Christ's Vicar upon earth ! , '; 
 
 The second is, " Peter is always named first, where the 
 apostles are spoken of." He is not always named first, Gal. 
 ii. 9, " When James, Cephas, and John, &c." Supposing he 
 is generally named first, he was probably the oldest : what 
 does this prove 1 Peter's supremacy ! 
 
 The third is, " Tribute is paid for Christ and Peter." Ad- 
 mitted. Does that prove that Peter's successors are above 
 all the kings of the earth, and should pay no tribute? 
 
 The fourth is, " Peter alone walks with Christ upon the 
 water." True — and " when he saw the wind boisterous, he 
 was afraid, and, beginning to sink, he cried, saying, Lord, 
 save me." Therefore Peter was the first Pope ! 
 
 The fifl;h is, Christ says specially to Peter, " I have 
 prayed for thee that thy faith fail not," &c. But did not 
 Christ pray thus specially for Peter because he knew that 
 his disciple was about to deny him under aggravating cir- 
 cumstances ? And if so, is not this a singular proof text of 
 Peter's infallibility? 
 
 The sixth, " Peter proposes the election of an apostle in 
 the place of the traitor Judas." He does. This establishes 
 
CONCERNING THE SUPREME PONTIFF. 227 
 
 his supremacy ! ! After the Holy Spirit had been received, 
 he first proclaims the gospel, does the first miracle, first be- 
 gins to preach to the Gentiles ! And for Peter prayer was 
 made without intermission by the church : and why 1 Be- 
 cause Peter was in prison. If any other apostle had been 
 there, they would have wrestled with the Lord in his behalf 
 just as they prayed for Peter's deliverance. This beloved 
 apostle was naturally ardent and impetuous ; Christ had loved 
 him much and forgiven him much, and this was enough to 
 make him bolder than his brethren, who had never denied 
 the Lord as he had done. But now, if these reasons consti- 
 tute an argument for Peter^s supremacy, we may adduce 
 others which will make John a rival candidate. 
 
 1. John was the only disciple who leaned on Jesus' breast 
 at the last supper. 
 
 2. John is called the disciple whom Jesus loved. 
 
 3. " Peter beckoned to him that he should ask who it 
 should be" that should betray the Lord. 
 
 4. John alone, of all the apostles, is said to have died a 
 natural death, and he survived all his apostolic brethren. 
 Thus, too, we might prove the supremacy of Paul and James 
 by facts peculiar to their history : but we have neither time 
 nor space to imitate the trifling of Romish Theologians. 
 
 The text upon which Papists place their main dependence 
 is that which is so elaborately discussed in the preceding sec- 
 tions : " Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my 
 church." They appear to lay almost as much stress upon 
 these words as upon the declaration of Christ at the institu- 
 tion of the Lord's Supper — " This is my body." If the words, 
 *' Thou art Peter," &c., are to be understood at all figu- 
 ratively, they tell us that the metaphor of which Christ makes 
 use is realized in the person of Peter. He, personally, is the 
 rock. We may, therefore, adopting the very principles of 
 interpretation by which they seek to vindicate the strange 
 doctrine of transubstantiation, require them to prove that Pe 
 
228 CONCERNING THE SUPREME PONTIFF. 
 
 ter was literally and truly a bona fide rock, and that the 
 Church of Christ was built upon the body and blood, bones 
 and sinews of the good apostle. " Thou art a rock, and 
 upon this rock I will build my church ;" most unquestiona- 
 bly, this interpretation will find readier belief than that Christ 
 gave his own body and blood, soul and divinity to the faith- 
 ful to be eaten to the end of time. The explanation to which 
 Peter Dens alludes, and which he professes to refute, is briefly 
 this. In the preceding verses, Christ asks his disciples, 
 " Whom say ye that I am ?" Peter replies, " Thou art Christ, 
 the Son of the living God." This good confession Christ 
 calls the rock upon which his Church should be built, allud- 
 ing at the same time to the signification of Peter's name. 
 He could not have intended that Peter should be literally and 
 truly the foundation of his Church, because we are expressly 
 told, " Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, 
 which is Christ Jesus." If Christ is the foundation of his 
 Church, and Peter is the foundation also, then there are two 
 foundations to the same building ; but this cannot be. As 
 to the distinction which Peter Dens makes in noticing this 
 objection, between the primary and secondary foundation, 
 when we find it in the Scriptures we will cheerfully endorse 
 it. It is remarkable that not a single passage is adduced 
 from any one of the primitive fathers to sustain the Romish 
 interpretation of the passage in question; Augustine declares 
 in so many words, when commenting on this text, " For it 
 was not said to him, thou art a rock, but thou art Peter : but 
 the rock was Christ.'''' 
 
 The apology which is offered for Augustine is creditable 
 neither to the Saint nor to the person who ofi^ers it. Accord- 
 ing to Peter Dens, Augustine equivocated somewhat, in or- 
 der to prevent the Donatists from retorting unpleasantly ! 
 The testimony of the fathers, however, must always be con- 
 sidered of secondary importance ; the best means of ascer- 
 
CONCERNING THE SUPREME PONTIFF. 229 
 
 taining the sense of Scripture is to collate one passage with 
 another, after examining the scope of the writer. 
 
 But, " the keys were given to Peter." So they were, and 
 Peter used them by opening the door of the gospel on the 
 great day of Pentecost, when the first fruits of the Spirit 
 were manifested in the conversion of three thousand souls. 
 When the pope becomes a preacher of the gospel of Christ, 
 and employs himself in laying the foundations of churches 
 by his personal ministry, we will acknowledge his claim to 
 be Peter's successor as more valid than it is at present. 
 II. The second point, which Papists must prove, is that 
 Peter was bishop of Rome, 
 
 1. If Peter really held this ©ffice by the tenure and for 
 the purpose, for which the church of Rome contends, then 
 it certainly ought to be considered as an article of faith, and 
 as such it would have been distinctly taught and enjoined in 
 the word of God. But the Scriptures are entirely silent on 
 this subject. 
 
 2. The utmost that can be said in favour of Peter's hav- 
 ing resided at Rome, is that it is probable, and even this can 
 scarcely be admitted as proved. But in a case of this kind 
 the utmost certainty is requisite. Peter dates his Epistle 
 from Babylon. Some suppose that this was the Babylon in 
 Assyria ; others understand it as a figurative name of Rome ; 
 and whatever reason there may be for supposing the latter 
 interpretation to be correct, we may rest assured that Romish 
 writers would, of all persons, be farthest from pleading that 
 Babylon is used figuratively for Rome, were it not that they 
 are sorely pressed for evidence to sustain a darling hy- 
 pothesis ; for by this admission, the Babylon of the Apoca- 
 lypse must likewise be understood as designating Rome. 
 Luke, who wrote the travels of the apostles Paul and Peter, 
 takes no notice of Peter's going there. And when the for- 
 mer apostle writes to the Romans, and sends greeting to 
 about forty by name, he says nothing of Peter, whom he 
 
230 CONCERNING THE SUPREME PONTIFF. 
 
 would scarcely have forgotten, if he had been the Pope's 
 prototype ; so too when Paul writes from Rome, he says not 
 a word of Peter. Pie even complains when writing from 
 that city to the Philippians, (ii. 20.,) that *' all sought their 
 own, not the things which are Jesus Christ's ;" and when 
 addressing the Colossians, (iv. 11.), he names a few, who 
 " were his only fellow helpers there." Writing to Timothy 
 from the same city, 2 Tim. iv. 16., he declares that " at his 
 first answer all men forsook him." Now Peter would surely 
 have proved himself a true yoke-fellow, had he then been 
 bishop of Rome. Indeed, the very nature of Peter's apos- 
 tolic office constrained him to go from place to place, to 
 preach the gospel, and it will hardly be asserted even by 
 Papists that the pretended chief of the apostles would act 
 contrary to his commission, and take upon him the charge 
 of a church in any particular city, which would necessarily 
 require such a residence there as was inconsistent with his 
 duties as an apostle. Besides, how could he, who was the 
 apostle of the Jews, take upon him the charge of a Gentile 
 Church ? And supposing that he was bishop of a church 
 of Jewish converts, Peter must have been strangely negli- 
 gent of his charge to have been absent from them for so 
 many years, and never write to the Romans as Paul did to 
 establish their faith, and not even mention them in his Epis- 
 tles. 
 
 Such is the silence of Scripture relative to Peter's resi- 
 dence at Rome, and such the obscurity of primitive antiquity 
 about it, that whilst we will not affirm that he never was in 
 that city, it is highly improbable that he lived there so soon 
 after the death of Christ, and for so long a period as Papists 
 would have us believe. There is not a particle of positive 
 proof extant to show that Peter was ever bishop of Rome, 
 whilst there is abundant evidence of the contrary. The 
 third point, whether the Popes are Peter's successors, we 
 reserve until the close of the following sections. 
 
SUCCESSION IN THE PRIMACY. 231 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 Concerning the successor of Peter in the Primacy. (92.) 
 
 *' Did any one succeed Peter in the primacy of the church ? 
 
 " The affirmative is a matter of faith, and is proved in 
 this vi^ay : Christ the Lord instituted the church, so that it 
 should endure to the end of time ; therefore, he must have 
 instituted in it a perpetual form of government ; and thus 
 at the death of Peter another must, by divine appointment, 
 succeed, who should be the visible head of the church, and 
 Christ's Vicar. 
 
 " Besides, Peter was appointed the foundation of a church, 
 that was to endure perpetually: therefore, the foundation 
 should be perpetual ; the keys also and the government must 
 continue, whilst the kingdom endures ; a pastor and ruler 
 are necessary for the sheep ; therefore the primacy of Peter 
 must continue whilst the church continues. 
 
 " Nor is it any objection that S. Gregory the Great, Bk. 5. 
 Epist. 20 — alias 32, condemns the name of universal bishop, 
 saying that it is a blasphemous name. For St. Gregory 
 means that it is blasphemous in this sense, as though one 
 man were bishop of the whole church, and the rest were 
 not true bishops of their own churches ; and hence, Bk. 7. 
 Epist. 79, he speaks thus : * If one man is universal (bishop), 
 it remains that you cannot be bishops.' Otherwise, if by the 
 universal bishop, you understand the Supreme Head, even of 
 Bishops, you will properly call the successor of Peter, uni- 
 versal Bishop. 
 
 "It is to be observed, however, that St. Gregory lays 
 great stress upon the novelty of this name, principally 
 because the Constantinopolitan bishop arrogantly usurped to 
 himself the name of universal bishop, to whom it certainly 
 by no means pertained. 
 
 " Who is this successor of Peter ? 
 
 " It is a matter of faith that he is the Roman Pontiff. It 
 is proved from the unwavering decree of general councils and 
 of the church, and from the doctrine of the Holy Fathers ; 
 
232 SUCCESSION IN THE PRIMACY. 
 
 so that on this account St. Augustine says, that this con- 
 tinuous succession from the very seat of Peter kept him in 
 the Catholic Church. 
 
 " This succession, down to this day in which Gregory XVI. 
 reigns, is continued in a series of 258 Pontiffs. 
 
 "As the primacy of the church is by divine right, has it 
 also been annexed by divine right to the Bishopric ; so that 
 the particular Roman Episcopate cannot be separated from 
 the Supreme Pontificate, but to the end of the world, is the 
 succession of Supreme Pontiffs to continue in the Roman 
 Bishops ? 
 
 " Ans. This is a controverted point : some suppose that 
 the primacy is annexed to the Roman Episcopate only by 
 human right; they say indeed that it has been merely 
 ordained by Christ, that the Episcopate should have the pri- 
 macy, which the church should designate : but the church 
 has designated the Roman Episcopate ; and hence, they say, 
 it may happen by the disposition of the Church, that the 
 primacy may be taken away from the Roman Episcopate. 
 
 " But it is more commonly maintained that the primacy 
 has been annexed to the Roman Episcopate by divine right ; 
 because, although the most weighty reasons were urgent, 
 such as were the persecutions of the Gentiles, and the 
 devastations of Rome, yet the thought never was harboured 
 of separating the Pontificate from the Roman Episcopate ; 
 therefore the church has thought that the primacy has, by 
 divine right, been annexed to the Roman Episcopate. 
 
 " Observe, that this question is different and independent 
 from these two, which are settled in the faith, that the pri- 
 macy of the church is of divine right, and that this primacy 
 should continue in the Roman Bishop, or Pope." 
 
 Concerning the Power of the Supreme Pontiff. (93.) 
 
 " From whom does the Pope, legitimately elected, receive 
 his power and jurisdiction ? 
 
 " Ans. He receives it immediately from Christ as his 
 Vicar, just as Peter received it. 
 
 " Nor is it any objection that the pope is elected by cardi- 
 nals ; for their election is only an essential requisite, which 
 being supplied, he receives power and jurisdiction imme- 
 diately from Christ. 
 
SUCCESSION IN THE PRIMACY. 233 
 
 " From whom do the Bishops receive the power of juris- 
 diction ] 
 
 " Ans. The French contend that they receive it imme- 
 diately from Christ; but it seems that it ought rather to be 
 said that they receive it immediately from the Roman Pon- 
 tiff, because the government of the church is monarchical, 
 &c., &c. 
 
 What and how great is the Power of the Supreme 
 Pontiff, (94.) 
 
 " What power has the Roman Pontiff? 
 
 " We reply with St. Thomas, &c. : ' The Pope has pleni- 
 TTJDB OF power IN THE CHURCH ;' SO that his power extends 
 to all who are in the church, and to all things which pertain 
 to the government of the church. 
 
 *' This is proved from what was said before : because the 
 Roman Pontiff is the true Vicar of Christ, the head of the 
 whole church, the pastor and teacher ; therefore, &c. 
 
 " Hence it follows, that all the faithful, even bishops and 
 patriarchs, are obliged to obey the Roman Pontiff; also, 
 that he must be obeyed in all things which concern the 
 Christian religion, and therefore, in faith and customs, in 
 rites, ecclesiastical discipline, &c. 
 
 " Hence, the perverse device of the Quesnellites falls to 
 the ground ; namely, that the pope is not to be obeyed, ex- 
 cept in those things which he enjoins conformably to Sacred 
 Scripture. 
 
 " Has the Supreme Pontiff not only directive, but also 
 compulsory power over all the faithful? 
 
 " Ans. Yes; because, Matt. xvi. 19, the power of binding, 
 which pertains to compulsory authority, is given to Peter 
 and his successors. Perpetual custom also confirms this , 
 hence, the power of suspending, excommunicating, &c., 
 belongs to the Supreme Pontiff. 
 
 *' ObJ. Christ says, Luke xxii. 25, * The kings of the 
 Gentiles lord it over them' — v. 26, ' But you not so ;' there- 
 fore, coercive power does not belong to ecclesiastics. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference ; for it is merely forbidden 
 that they govern in the manner of Gentile kings ; and hence 
 he adds : ' But you not so ;' that is, they should not rule 
 20 
 
234 SUCCESSION IN THE PRIMACY. 
 
 tyrannically and haughtily, seek their own advantage, glory, 
 &;c. in ruling." 
 
 The following section (95) discusses the question whether 
 the Pope is superior to a general council. 
 
 "The question is not concerning a council assembled 
 together with the Pope : for in this case the pontiff cannot 
 be above the council, as he must then be superior to him- 
 self; but he is of equal authority with the council. 
 
 *' It is asked, therefore, whether a general council taken 
 by itself without the Pope, but yet lawfully assembled, is 
 above the pontiff? 
 
 " The French maintain the affirmative : out of France it 
 is commonly affirmed that the Pope is superior to a general 
 council, so that he may transfer, dissolve it, &c. 
 
 "This is proved : Christ said to Peter, not to the council ; 
 * I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven ; 
 feed my sheep,' &c. Peter, therefore, and his successors 
 are the head and pastor, not only of the church in its dis- 
 persed state, or of single believers, but, also, of the church 
 assembled in council : for the head is superior not only to 
 each member particularly but taken together : the shepherd 
 governs and is superior not only to each sheep in particular, 
 but to the whole flock : and hence the Chalcedonian Coun- 
 cil in a letter to Pope Leo acknowledges him as their head 
 and father," &c. 
 
 Concerning the Infallibility of the Supreme Pontiff. (96.) 
 
 " It is to be premised that the Pope is sometimes said to 
 speak or determine ex cathedra, but sometimes not, but as a 
 private doctor, or as replying to a particular question or 
 case. 
 
 " He is regarded as speaking ex cathedra, (from the 
 throne) when he speaks from the plenitude of power, pre- 
 scribing to the whole church anything as a doctrine to be 
 believed by faith, or observed in customs, or accepted as 
 good or religious. 
 
 " Is the opinion of the Supreme Pontiff of infallible au- 
 thority 1 
 
 " The Supreme Pontiff just as- an entire general council 
 may err in mere facts, or in things not concerning faith or 
 
SUCCESSION IN THE PRIMACY. 235 
 
 customs : because infallibility in such things is not necessary 
 for the government of the church, nor does a mistake injure 
 the integrity of religion. 
 
 " He may also err, when he does not speak ex cathedra : 
 and thus, if a work on theology or law is published by the 
 Supreme Pontiff, there may possibly be errors in it : because 
 it bears no other authority before itself than that of a pri- 
 vate doctor ; as Benedict XIV. declares concerning his own 
 works in a brief to James Facciolatus, which he wished to 
 have prefixed to the first volume. A mistake may possibly 
 be found in some decrees entered upon the canonical law : 
 because, although those decrees are entered upon the canoni- 
 cal law, that the judges might have some rule in judging, 
 yet the pontiffs do not present them all as definitions of the 
 faith. 
 
 " The Supreme Pontiff determining from the throne mat- 
 ters relating to faith or customs is infallible : which infalli- 
 bility proceeds from the special assistance of the Holy 
 Spirit." 
 
 The three following passages of Scripture are then ad- 
 duced as proofs that the pope is infallible. Matt. xvi. 18. 
 " Thou art Peter," &c. Luke xxii. 32. " I have prayed for 
 thee that thy faith fail not, and thou, when once thou art 
 converted, strengthen thy brethren ;" where Christ promises 
 Peter indefectibility that he may confirm his brethren in the 
 faith : which belongs to the office of pastor and head, and 
 thus, also, to the successors of Peter. 
 
 " It is proved 3d from John xxi. 17., where it is enjoined 
 upon Peter and consequently on his successors that they feed 
 and rule the whole church : therefore the whole church is 
 bound to hear and to follow the doctrine of the pontiff: and 
 hence if he can err, the whole church will err, which can- 
 not happen, according to No. 80, &c., &c. 
 
 " ObJ. I. The Pope may err in matters of faith and cus- 
 toms if he does not apply the necessary diligence: but it is 
 possible that he may not apply the necessary diligence: 
 therefore he may err. 
 
 " Ans. The same arguments may be framed against the 
 infallibility of a general council, which yet by the confes- 
 sion of our adversaries would not be conclusive : therefore, 
 it is also not conclusive against the infallibility of the pope. 
 
236 SUCCESSION IN THE PRIMACY. 
 
 " We say, therefore, that the Pope, just as llic general 
 council, ought to apply the necessary diligence to proceed 
 prudently: but yet that the infallibility neither of the pope 
 nor of the council depends on the condition that they have 
 proceeded carefully ; it is justly taken for granted, however, 
 that all diligence has been applied in determining. 
 
 " Ohj. 11. Therefore, general councils are useless : for 
 the Pope, as he is infallible, may by himself determine all 
 controversies about faith and customs by a judgment that 
 cannot be improved. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : by way of proof, it is to 
 be remarked that, although the Pope is infallible, yet he 
 ought not to neglect human and ordinary means, by which 
 he may arrive at the knowledge of the truth of the thing in 
 debate : but the ordinary means is a greater or less council 
 as the importance of the case demands, &c., &c. 
 
 " Various pontiffs are cited as objections, who are accused 
 of error in decrees concerning the faith or customs. 
 
 " Ans. It is to be observed generally for the solution (of 
 this difficulty,) that this error is either in mere facts, or in 
 things not pertaining to faith and customs, or in decrees 
 which are not ex cathedra, and, therefore, they do not at all 
 hinder the conclusion, just as, also, the personal failings of 
 the Popes are no objection." 
 
 Whether the Pope at least as a private person may be a 
 heretic? (97.) 
 
 " Although this would be no impediment to the preceding 
 conclusion, as has been said, yet the negative opinion seems 
 the more probable, so that the privilege of Peter, Luke xxii. 
 32 : * I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not,' may 
 also be transferred to the successors of Peter ; and it is 
 agreeable to divine providence, that he who is a teacher of 
 the faith, should himself not fail from the faith. 
 
 "It is proved also by this, that it could never yet be 
 proved concerning any Pope, that he was a formal heretic ; 
 and this, St. Augustine, Epist. 165, concerning the Popes, 
 attests up to his own times. 
 
 " Obj. I. Marcellinus, under Dioclesian, burnt incense to 
 an idol, therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. Augustine, and after him, Baronius, Bellarmine, 
 
THE POPE CANNOT BE A HERETIC. 237 
 
 Christianus Lupus, &;c., say, that this lapse of Marcellinus 
 is a fiction fabricated by the Donatists ; Binius Schelstra- 
 tius and others, who admit the lapse,- say that Marcellinus 
 burnt incense to idols through fear of death, and therefore 
 that he sinned against the profession of faith, but did not 
 lose the faith internally. 
 
 " Obj. 11. Pope Liberius subscribed to the Syrmian for- 
 mula of faith, prepared by the Arians, and the condemnation 
 of Athanasius, who held the true faith ; therefore he was a 
 heretic. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : it is indeed true that Libe- 
 rius was sent into exile on account of the Catholic faith, and 
 that at length, overcome by calamities, and protracted mis- 
 fortune, he communicated with the Arians, and subscribed 
 the condemnation of Athanasius, not for the sake of his 
 faith, but on account of accusations falsely laid to his charge 
 by the Arians. 
 
 *' He afterwards subscribed to the Syrnnian formula, which, 
 (notwithstanding it did not sufficiently explain the faith,) 
 contained nothing contrary to the faith, although in it the 
 word consuhstantial was suppressed ; from which, therefore, 
 it cannot be proved that Liberius was a heretic, although he 
 may not be excused from sin in the manner of acting. 
 
 "There are not wanting some, however, who regard the 
 lapse of Liberius as a mere fable, circulated by the Arians, 
 and believed by a few Catholics, as is commonly the case. 
 See Collet, &c. 
 
 " Ohj. in. Honorius L was a Monothelite ; therefore, &:c. 
 
 " The antecedent is proved ; because, in a letter to Ser- 
 gius, he teaches that in Christ there was one will and not 
 two. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the antecedent : for proof, it is said that in 
 these letters, he did not deny that in Christ there are two 
 wills, divine and human ; but he only denied that there were 
 two human wills warrinar against each other, the one of the 
 nesh, the other of the spirit; such as we find in ourselves, 
 by which, from our depraved nature, the flesh lusts against 
 the Spirit : and he enjoined that they should abstain from the 
 words, ' one or two wills,' lest from the different interpretation 
 of the words, a schism might arise. 
 20* 
 
238 THE POPE CANNOT BE A HERETIQ. 
 
 *'You will urge: the Sixth Synod condemned Honorius 
 as a heretic ; therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. Sylvius, with some others, contends that the acts 
 of this Synod have been corrupted, and the name of Hono- 
 rius substituted in place of Theodorus : but this plea, Tho- 
 massinus refutes in a learned manner, in his 20th dissertation 
 on Synod 6. 
 
 " Others say that the sixth Synod, in condemning Honorius, 
 erred, namely, by a mistake of a merely personal fact, not 
 about the literal sense of the dogmatical texts ; for, they say, 
 the judgment of the Synod was merely criminal, not dog- 
 matical : for the question was principally concerning the per- 
 son of Honorius ; and hence, his letters were not primarily 
 discussed, in order that inquiry might be made concerning 
 doctrine, but only that the person might be judged ; in which 
 judgment it was admitted, No. 84, that the church might em 
 
 "Others say, that Honorius, in the sixth Synod, was con- 
 demned as a favourer of heresy, but not as a heretic; and 
 the fact favours this opinion, that Leo II., who confirmed the 
 Synod, in various passages, blames only the negligence and 
 imprudence of Honorius, by which he permitted the .immacu- 
 late faith to be stained ; also that Constantine Pogonatus, the 
 emperor, who was present at this Council, condemns Ho- 
 norius as the favourer, abettor, and confirmer of heresy. It 
 is indeed true that an anathema was pronounced upon Ho- 
 norius as a heretic ; but the Fathers seem not to have dis- 
 tinguished between heretics and the favourers of heresy ,* at 
 least, the very words of the Fathers blame the connivance 
 of Honorius, rather than his open profession of heresy. 
 
 " Obj. IV. Dist. 46 Can. If the Pope, &c. : the Pope is 
 said to judge all persons, and to be judged by none, unless he 
 shall be detected deviating from the faith ; therefore, he may 
 be a formal heretic. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : for it is only said what may 
 be done in case that the Pope fails from the faith ; but we 
 think that this case never has happened, and never will 
 occur." 
 
TEMPORAL POV/ER OF THE POPE. 239 
 
 Concerning the Temporal Power of the Supreme 
 Pontiff. (98.) 
 
 " Has the Supreme Pontiff also a certain temporal and 
 civil power? 
 
 " J./IS. It is certain that he has even direct power in 
 places subject to him by temporal dominion. For it is no 
 objection that the same person is an ecclesiastical chief, and 
 a political one in temporal things, as appears in Melchize- 
 dech, the Machabees, &c. 
 
 " Has the Pope also temporal power over all kingdoms of 
 the world 1 
 
 " Ans. There have been those, as Bellarmine shows, Bk. 5, 
 concerning the Roman Pontiff, who ascribed to the Pontiff 
 by divine right the most plenary and direct power over the 
 whole world, as well in temporal as in spiritual things ; but 
 this opinion is rejected by all. 
 
 *' Bellarmine, Sylvius, and others, say that the Pope has 
 not by divine right direct power over temporal kingdoms, 
 but indirect ; that is, wheji the spiritual power cannot be 
 freely exercised, nor his object be attained, by spiritual, 
 then he may have recourse to temporal means, according 
 to St. Thomas, 22, 9, 10, a 12, s. q. 12, a 2, who teaches 
 that princes may sometimes be deprived of their rule, and 
 their subjects be liberated from the oath of fidelity ; and 
 thus it has been done by Pontiffs more than once. 
 
 " The other opinion teaches that kings and princes in 
 temporal concerns are by no means subject to pontifical and 
 ecclesiastical power, and that they cannot be deposed directly 
 or indirectly by the authority of the keys, and that their sub- 
 jects cannot be relieved from faith and obedience, or absolved 
 from the oath of fidelity which they have taken. Thus the 
 ''■^claration of the Galilean clergy, in the year 1682, asserts, 
 which many foreign (clergy) follow. The treatise of Bellar- 
 mine, concerning the power of the Supreme Pontiff in tem- 
 poral concerns, against Barclay, the Parisian senate had con- 
 demned already in 1610, as may be seen in Tournely." 
 
 The claim of the Pope to universal spiritual supremacy 
 upon earth, is, if possible, even still more absurd than the 
 
240 SUPREMACY OF THE FOPE. 
 
 plea which is offered for the primacy of Peter. If the Pope 
 is the successor of Peter, it must be either in his pecuhar 
 office as apostle, or as Bishop of Rome, or as the Head of 
 the Church : but he cannot succeed Peter as an apostle, for 
 the apostolic office was not continued after the death of the 
 twelve, whom Christ himself appointed, as they neither con- 
 stituted any others to succeed them in that office, nor had they 
 authority to do so. He cannot succeed him as Bishop of 
 Rome, for it never yet has been proved that Peter held that 
 office, but on the contrary there is abundant presumptive evi- 
 dence of the very strongest character to show that he could 
 not have been the Bishop of any Church at Rome. The 
 Pope cannot succeed Peter as the Head of the Church, for 
 Peter never was appointed as such, and never claimed to be 
 Christ's vicar upon earth. He expressed his concern that 
 the things he presented might " always be had in remem- 
 brance after his decease," but neither he nor any other in- 
 spired writer alludes even in the most distant manner to his 
 giving a commission to the Bishops of Rome to succeed him ; 
 but he certainly would not have failed to mention in precise 
 and. explicit terms the nature of his supremacy, nor could 
 the other apostles have been utterly silent in relation to it, if 
 he and his successors had been appointed as Christ's vicars 
 upon earth to the end of time. We may rest assured that 
 if the doctrine of the Pope's supremacy were really taught 
 in the Bible, it would have been declared in terms as precise 
 and definite as justification by faith or the resurrection from 
 the dead. 
 
 But not only are the Scriptures silent in relation to this 
 subject, but" no authority can be gathered from the testimony 
 of the purest antiquity to sustain this strange and presump- 
 tuous claim of the Romish Church. Which of the early 
 fathers plainly declare in so many words, or in language that 
 unequivocally imports that Christ constituted Peter the uni- 
 
SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 241 
 
 versal Bishop of his Church, and the Bishops of Rome his 
 successors in that office 1 
 
 How strange it is, if they recognised an infallible Head 
 upon earth, that they should have toiled and laboured so as- 
 siduously to compose elaborate confutations of heretics, when 
 there was a visible infallible guide to whom every difficulty 
 might have been referred, and from whose decision none who 
 professed to acknowledge the authority of Christ and the Holy 
 Scriptures could possibly appeal ? But when do they ever 
 refer heretics to such a judge of controversy 1 When? The 
 testimony of many of the writers, whom Papists designate 
 as belonging to the Fathers of the Church, is of very little 
 value, inasmuch as they were interested in sustaining abuses 
 which they had themselves assisted in bringing into thechurch ; 
 this remark will not generally apply to the standard-bearers 
 of the First and Second and some of the Third and even 
 Fourth Century, but after that period very many of the Fa- 
 thers are witnesses of very doubtful reputation. 
 
 It is amusing to see the perfect nonchalance with which 
 Peter Dens passes over the most formidable objections of wri- 
 ters, for whose authority Romish Priests profess the greatest 
 deference. Thus, when Gregory the Great condemns the 
 name of universal Bishop as blasphemous, there is a "dis- 
 tingue" at hand, which explains the difficulty at once. The 
 whole secret of the case was that Gregory conceived it to be 
 blasphemous in the Bishop of Constantinople to affect a dig- 
 nity, for which he was himself an aspirant. We care not 
 for his opinion except in so far as his indignant rebuke of the 
 Constantinopolitan Bishop is some proof that the claim to 
 universal supremacy was a novelty in his day. 
 
 As for Peter's supremacy, it is plain that it did not exone- 
 rate him from subjection to his brethren, before whom he 
 pleaded his cause, and by w?iom he was sent as a messen- 
 ger, Acts viii. 14, and xi. 3. Nor did his infallibility render 
 him proof against error, for which Paul withstood him to his 
 
242 SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 
 
 face, Gal. ii. 11. And though Christ prayed for Peter, that 
 his faith might not fail, and thus rendered him and his suc- 
 cessors indefectible, yet it was but a very few hours after the 
 Saviour had thus prayed that Peter denied him — denied him 
 thrice, and with an oath ! This shows surely that the Lord 
 Jesus did not intend by this expression to intimate to his dis- 
 ciple that he never should commit an error, much less that 
 his successors should have this privilege ; but he told him 
 that he had prayed for him that his faith might not fail, or 
 in other words, that he might not perish as a castaway. It 
 is evident that if Christ had prayed that Peter might not err 
 either in faith or practice, his disciple would not have fallen 
 into the sin of a gross and aggravated perjury only a few 
 hours after the annunciation of his confirmed indefectibility. 
 But the Pope claims " plenitude of power in the church, so 
 that his power extends to all who are in the church, and to 
 all things which pertain to the government of the church." 
 *' He must be obeyed in all things which concern the Chris- 
 tian religion." These assertions, although extravagant 
 enough, are not quite so audacious as the language of some 
 other approved writers of the Romish Church. Cardinal 
 Zabar, speaking of the Popes, affirms — " That they might 
 do all things which they choose, even things unlawful, and 
 so could do more than God himself" The canonists re- 
 peatedly compliment the Pope as " Our Lord God, the Pope !" 
 This title was given to the Pope by the Council of Lateran, 
 Sess. 4. Gratian asserts, " That all mortals are to be judged 
 by the Pope, but the Pope by nobody at all." It would in- 
 deed be a hard matter to judge him, if Massonus be sjood 
 authority, for in his third Book, in the life of Pope John IX., 
 he tells us " That the Bishops of Rome cannot commit even 
 sin without praise ! I" Now, I do not wish to imply that 
 every Romanist would approve of such horrid blasphemy as 
 this ; it is more than enough to brand their church with in- 
 famy, that there has been a time in her history when such 
 
SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 243 
 
 writers were permitted to express these and similar sentiments 
 without rebuke ! 
 
 The supremacy of Peter did not exempt him from paying 
 tribute even to a heathen, Matt. xvii. 27. Strange as it is, 
 it is nevertheless true that this fact is mentioned as one of 
 the prerogatives of Christ's vicar; Peter Dens actually bases 
 an argument for the supremacy upon this fact ! ! If the Pope 
 were to follow Peter's example in this respect, what would 
 become of the Apostolic See ! In his epistles, Peter urges 
 many precepts of obedience to princes — " Submit to every 
 ordinance of man, whether it be to the king as supreme, or 
 to governors," &c. 1 Pet. ii. 13. But the Pope not only de- 
 nies obedience to any earthly sovereign, but even in this en- 
 lightened age, His Holiness still claims the right of depriv- 
 ing princes of their rule, and liberating their svbjectsfrom 
 the oath of fidelity ! Whilst the ridiculous c]aim of univer- 
 sal temporal supremacy is avowedly repudiated, the Romish 
 Priests are still taught by their theology, " When the Spirit- 
 ual power cannot be freely exercised, nor his (i. e., the 
 Pope's) object be attained by Spiritual, that he may have 
 recourse to temporal means, according to St. Thomas, who 
 teaches that princes may sometimes be deprived of their 
 rule, and their subjects be liberated from the oath of fidel- 
 ity ; and thus it has been done by Pontiffs more than 
 once ! /" (Sec. 98.) 
 
 Thus Pope Zachary deposed Childeric, King of France, 
 and set up Pepin in his stead ! Thus Pope Alexander III., 
 planting his foot upon the neck of the Emperor Frederic I., 
 profanely quoted the Scripture. Ps. xci. 13. "Thou shalt 
 tread upon the lion and the adder," &c. Thus Pius V., in 
 the insolent Bull, which he issued as a declaration of Queen 
 Elizabeth's deposition, and by which her subjects were ab- 
 solved, forsooth 1 from their allegiance, apglied to himself 
 the words, " See, I have this day set thee over the nations, and 
 over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to do- 
 
244 SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 
 
 stroy, and to throw down, to build and to plant." Jer. i. 10. 
 This is " submitting to every ordinance of man," with a ven- 
 geance ! 
 
 Now I desire to call attention to the fact, that the Pope 
 still claims, by divine right, indirect power over all the 
 kingdoms and nations of the earth. His priests are his 
 sworn subjects, and must promote the interests of their Lord 
 God, the Pope, or they are perjured men ! From their own 
 principles, therefore, we prove the system of Popery to be 
 nothing more nor less than a politico-religious power, which 
 must aim at supremacy, because it claims it as its due ! 
 
 But to return to the consideration of the Pope's claim tc 
 universal supremacy. Let us hear the story of his succes- 
 sion as Romish authors relate it. Platina, the Secretary of 
 Pope Sixtus IV., who wrote the lives of the Popes, tells us 
 that Peter, some time before his death, consecrated Clement, 
 and commended him to the chair of the Church of God, in 
 these very, words : " The same power of binding and loosing 
 I deliver to thee, which Christ left me : do thou, contemning 
 and despising all outward things, promote by prayer and 
 preaching the salvation of men, as becomes a good pastor." 
 Certam it is, that the successors of Peter have, in late ages, 
 grievously neglected and forgotten the latter part of this 
 charge. But how is it, after this formal story, related no 
 doubt with the utmost gravity, that the same author mentions 
 one Linus as Peter's immediate successor, and tells us that 
 he occupied the chair eleven years, three months, and twelve 
 days exactly J and after him a certain Cletus was Pope for 
 just twelve years, one month, and eleven days ; and then, 
 after this lapse of nearly twenty-four years, honest Father 
 Clement begins to occupy the seat of Peter, and holds it nine 
 years, two months, and ten days. Now this story twists the 
 line of succession into a knot at the very outset ; for if Pe- 
 ter ordained Clement as his successor, Linus and Cletus had 
 no right to interfere with his claim. But without pressing 
 
SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 245 
 
 this point, if Peter did ordain either Clement or Linus, or 
 any other man as Head of the Church, then he either divest- 
 ed himself of that authority, and became subject to the new 
 Head, or else from that time to his death the Church had 
 two visible heads. 
 
 Moreover, if Clement, Linus, or any one else succeeded 
 Peter in the primacy, then James and John, and the other 
 apostles, who survived Peter, became subject to Clement or 
 Linus, or whoever the new Head might be. For the histo- 
 rians, upon whose authority Papists mainly rely, tell us that 
 Peter suffered under Nero, but John long after under Domi- 
 tian. But is it reasonable to suppose that the men, who 
 were called by Christ himself to the apostolic office, and 
 who are represented as at least equal with Peter, should be- 
 come inferior and subject to an ordinary pastor, who was 
 called by man and not by Christ to the primacy 1 How then 
 are we to account for the fact, that the writings of James 
 and John are owned by the Church as pertaining to the ca- 
 non of Scripture, whereas the writings of Clement are re- 
 jected as apocryphal ? 
 
 But even supposing that Christ ordained Peter, and Peter 
 ordained Linus or some one else, what has this to do with 
 the Popes of the last ages, who are elected by the Cardinals ? 
 From whom do the Cardinals receive their power ? If from 
 God, let them produce a " thus saith the Lord ;" if from 
 men, let them show by what authority. The name of Car- 
 dinal was never heard of in the church till the 8th Century, 
 and it was not till the 11th Century that they were formed 
 into a regular order under John XVIII., if ecclesiastical his- 
 tory is to be credited. Besides, Platina, the Romish historian, 
 calls this John *' a robber and a thief in his pontificate," and 
 thinks him unworthy to be " placed in the number of the 
 Popes," having assumed the pontifical authority while Gre- 
 gory V. was alive. This is a hopeful origin indeed of the 
 blessed order of Cardinals ! But their subsequent history is 
 21 
 
246 SUPREMACY OP^ THE POPE. 
 
 not unworthy of their parentage ; for he is very ignorant, who 
 does not know that ambition and bribery, and the influence 
 and interests of temporal princes, have ruled the conclave, 
 instead of the blessed Spirit of the living God ! 
 
 And then, look for a moment at the uninterrupted succes- 
 sion of the *' Series of 258 Popes !" Is it not notorious, that 
 for several years there was no Pope at all ? Do we not 
 know that at other times there were two or three Popes at 
 once; that one anathematized another, and that infallible 
 Popes and Councils have condemned several of the occupants 
 of Peter's chair as heretical and illegitimate ? Through which 
 of these channels must the pure stream of uninterrupted suc- 
 cession flow ] Some of these Popes must be spurious, and 
 amidst this endless variety of contradictory decrees, who can 
 determine which were the true successors of St. Peter, or 
 whether the present Pope is lawfully descended from him? 
 
 But since Papists will insist upon their succession, let us 
 see if Peter Dens is authorized to say, "that it could never 
 yet be proved, concerning any Pope, that he was a formal 
 heretic !" The 97ih section, in which the question is dis- 
 cussed, " Whether the Pope, at least as a private person, 
 may be a heretic," is a model of Jesuitical cunning. 
 When evidence as clear as the sun is brought forward to 
 controvert a doctrine, which Papists must maintain at all ha- 
 zards, there are distinguos enough at hand to foil every ob- 
 jection. But if we admit, for argument's sake, that Marcel- 
 linus, Liberius, &c., were not heretics, and that the apology 
 offered for them, lame as it is, is sufficient, what are we to 
 think of John XXII., who denied the immortality of the soul ? 
 What say our Romish friends to John XXIII., Gregory XII., 
 and Benedict XIII., who were all Popes at once, and were 
 all cashiered by the Council of Constance as illegitimate ? 
 Did not the Council of Basil convict Pope Eugenius both of 
 schism and heresy ? Was not Pope Anastasius excommu- 
 nicated by the Roman clergy as a heretic? Is it not matter. 
 
SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 247 
 
 of historical record, that Pope Sylvester sacrificed to the de- 
 vil, that Pope Formosus obtained the chaii* by perjury, that 
 his holiness, Sergius III., caused another Pope's body to be 
 digged up out of his grave, the head to be cut off and thrown 
 into the Tiber, and that Pope Boniface iniprisoned his infal- 
 lible predecessor and plucked out his eyes ? 
 
 These are but a few samples of the immaculate orthodoxy 
 of the successors of St. Peter ! Atheists and blasphemers, 
 rebels and murderers, conjurors and adulterers supply not a 
 few of the links of this apostolical chain ! No wonder that 
 not a man who has ever occupied the papal throne has ever 
 presumed to bear the name of Peter after his inauguration ; 
 even when they had formerly been known by that name, they 
 changed it at their accession to the chair ! Thus Peter de 
 Tarantasia became Innocent IV. ; Peter Carafa changed his 
 name to Paul V. ; and Sergius III. was once a Peter too. 
 This fact would seem to imply that these men must have 
 been conscious of the vast disparity between Peter the Pope, 
 and Peter the apostle ! It is not without reason, certainly, 
 that the anecdote is related of the famous painter, Raphael 
 Urbin, who, when reproved by the Pope for putting too much 
 colour on the faces of Peter and Paul, replied, that he did it 
 on purpose to represent them as blushing in heaven to see 
 what successors they had on the earth ! 
 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 The Treatises on the virtue of hope and the virtue of 
 charity, which constitute the 2d and 3d parts of the second 
 volume, although marked by a few peculiarities, contain no- 
 thing which would be specially interesting to the general 
 reader, and I therefore omit them. The Treatise concerning 
 Right and Justice, which occupies a large portion of the thir*^ 
 
S48 CONCERNING THEFT AND RAPINE. 
 
 volume, presents amongst other things sound practical 
 casuistry in a variety of cases in which restitution should 
 be made, about which, however, there could be very little 
 debate among men of common honesty. The 88th, and 
 the following sections of this tre^itise may speak for them- 
 selves. 
 
 Concerning the grievousness of the sin of theft and 
 rapine. (88.) 
 
 " How great a sin are theft and rapine ? 
 
 " Ans. They are from their very nature mortal sins. 
 It is proved from 1 Cor. vi. 10., where it is said : ' nor 
 thieves, nor extortioners shall possess the kingdom of God :' 
 besides they are grievously repugnant to the love and justice 
 of our neighbour, and tend to overturn the common peace. 
 
 " Obj, Prov. vi. 30. It is said, ' The fault is not so great, 
 when a man hath stolen : for he stealeth to fill his hungry 
 soul.' 
 
 " St. Thomas replies to this : I. ' It must be said that theft 
 is declared to be not a great fault for a twofold reason. 
 First, indeed, on account of the necessity inducing to theft, 
 which diminishes or totally removes the fault. And hence, 
 it is added : for he stealeth to fill his hungry soul. Theft 
 is said in another mode not to be a great fault by compari- 
 son with the guilt of adultery, which is punished with death. 
 And hence it is added, concerning the thief, that if he be 
 taken he shall restore sevenfold : but he that is an adulterer 
 shall destroy his own soul.' 
 
 " In how many ways may theft be venial 1 
 
 " Principally in two ways : namely, from the imperfect 
 deliberation of the act ; and from the trifling value of the 
 matter. 
 
 " The former mode is not easily imagined in the external 
 removal* of the property of another, but it may more readily 
 be done by inflicting injury, and by internal acts. The 
 theft, for instance, of a single farthing is venial by reason 
 of the small value of the thing. 
 
 " Some add two other modes, 1. From ignorance slightly 
 culpable^ that the thing was the property of another. 
 " 2. That the owner in an important matter is not much 
 
CONCERNING THEFT AND RAPINE. 249 
 
 opposed, but is unwilling only as to the mode of taking it. 
 But these two ways may be absolutely reduced to the trifling 
 value of the thing ; because, although a thing may be im- 
 portant in itself, yet in the degree of this theft, it may be 
 said to be of little moment. 
 
 " The theft of a trifling thing may become mortal in vari- 
 ous ways, as will be shown hereafter. 
 
 " What quantity is requisite before a theft can be mortal 
 in regard to its matter? 
 
 " Ans. Certain authors refer the quantity respectively to 
 the persons, upon whom the loss is inflicted : so that a thing 
 may be a mortal matter if it is taken from a poor person, 
 which would not be mortal if it were taken from a rich man ; 
 but this in our day appears antiquated, and the absolute 
 quantity is now usually determined not by considering whe- 
 ther the person from whom it may be taken is rich or poor : 
 the reason is that the richer has not a less right over his 
 property than the poorer person ; and, therefore, when an 
 equal quantity is taken from both sides, injury is in so far 
 inflicted, not less on the richer than on the poorer. 
 
 " With these remarks the fact agrees that the penitent in 
 confession ought to declare, whether he has taken the thing 
 from a poor or from a rich man : but this is not in regard 
 o the theft, but on account of the inconvenience and the 
 consequences, which usually proceed from a theft committed 
 on a poor man ; as, his earnings being suspended, loss ac- 
 cruing, hunger, grief, &c. : but all these things are apart 
 from the theft. 
 
 " If you say that a rich man is not so unwilling as to the 
 theft of, for instance, 24 farthings : I reply that he must be 
 presumed to be unwilling in proportion to the amount. That 
 if it is admitted that the owner is not much opposed, then 
 indeed it may become venial, as was said above: but inde- 
 pendently of the question, whether the owner is rich or poor. 
 
 " What quantity appears absolutely sufficient for mortal 
 theft in regard to amount ? 
 
 " The more common and plausible opinion reckons that 
 the hire or daily wages of a man labouring in some honour- 
 able trade is sufficient ; that is three or four shillings for 
 this lime and for this country ; because, in proportion as 
 daily labour is accounted severe, the pay is correspondent. 
 21* 
 
250 CONCERNING THEFT AND RAPINE. 
 
 " It is said, three or four shillings ; because this quantity 
 cannot be physically or mathematically determined, but only 
 morally ; ' and perhaps it is concealed for this reason;' says 
 St. August. (Bk. xxi. de Civ. Dei. last chap.,) Mest the 
 desire might abate of improving so as to avoid all sins.' 
 And 17th chap, of Enchirid. he says : * there are certain 
 things, which it is more useful not to know than to know.' 
 
 " It is said, also, for this time and for this country; be- 
 cause, where money is more plenty or more scarce, a greater 
 or less quantity is requisite, and in the time in which money 
 was more scarce here, a less quantity was sufficient ; as iji 
 accordance with these things, the daily pay of a labourer is 
 usually increased or diminished." 
 
 Concerning the palliations or Excuses of thefts. (89.) 
 
 " There are two principal claims, under which thefts are 
 wont to be covered ; namely, the claims of necessity, and 
 oi just compensation. Hence it is asked : 
 
 " Whether it is lawful to steal in a case of necessity : or 
 rather, whether it is lawful to take another's property on ac- 
 count of necessity 1 
 
 " /. Observe. It is important to distinguish a threefold 
 necessity : extreme, in which life is in danger : urgent, in 
 which health, or station is endangered ; and common, which 
 the poor suffer everywhere. 
 
 " //. Ans. It is lawful to take another man's property, 
 either secretly or openly, in so far as there is necessity for 
 supplying extreme want: the reason is, because then all 
 things are common. 
 
 " If this was lawful in order to supply my own extreme 
 necessity, the same will be lawful for the necessity of my 
 neighbour ; unless I can succour him from my own means. 
 
 *' This case alone is excepted, namely, when by taking 
 another man's property, the owner would be also brought 
 into similar necessity. 
 
 *' Is he thought to be in extreme necessity, who by asking 
 or begging can relieve his extreme necessity? 
 
 " Ans. No : for no one is thought to be in extreme neces- 
 sity, who may relieve it by lawful means, nor should this 
 means be called unbecoming for an honourable man : for 
 nothing is dishonourable for necessity. Besides such a pre- 
 
CONCERNING THEFT AND RAPINE. 251 
 
 text would open the door for many thefts and for disturbance 
 of the state. 
 
 " Should those things which are taken away through ne- 
 cessity be restored ? 
 
 " If the thing taken away still remains after the necessity 
 is over, it is doubtless to be restored : because extreme ne- 
 cessity does not confer a right to another man's property ex- 
 cept in so far as is necessary for its relief: and hence if, in 
 order to escape death, you have made use of another man's 
 horse, you ought to restore it when the exigency is over. 
 
 " If the thing be consumed, — for instance, wine, bread, 
 <Sz;c., he ought to restore nothing, even if after suffering want 
 he should come into better fortune. Except unless he has 
 goods elsewhere, and thus may be supposed rather to take 
 another's property by way of borrowing ; for then it should 
 be restored : nor is such a one properly in extreme necessity, 
 but only in respect to some thing. 
 
 " What must be said concerning common and urgent ne- 
 cessity ? 
 
 " It is agreed among all that it is not lawful to take an- 
 other's property on account of common necessity. 
 
 " Nor is it lawful to take what is another's on account of 
 any pressing necessity whatsoever, distinct from extreme ; 
 because goods do not become common on account of such 
 a necessity ; the reason is, because as cases of urgent neces- 
 sity are very common, disturbance of the state would easily 
 ensue if then it were lawful to steal the property of another. 
 
 " Hence this 36th proposition was condemned by Innocent 
 XI. : ' It is permitted to steal not only in extreme but also in 
 urgent necessity.' 
 
 " Yet authors agree that the sin- of him who steals from 
 urgent necessity is diminished so much the more as the ne- 
 cessity is greater. 
 
 " Ohj. St. Thomas does not distinguish between extreme 
 and urgent necessity, therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the antecedent. It is plain from Art. 7, in 
 Corp., &c. 
 
 " Ohj. II. The things which some persons have supera- 
 bundantly, are due by natural law to the support of the poor, 
 says St. Thomas : but this is true, not only in extreme, but 
 
252 CONCERNING THEFT AND RAPINE. 
 
 also in urgent necessity ; therefore poor people may take 
 those things as due to themselves in urgent necessity. 
 
 " Ans. From this argument it would follow that this might 
 be lawful not only in urgent but also in common necessity ; 
 which no one would say. Besides, when any one is obliged 
 to give something to another, the other may not on that ac- 
 count steal it ; and especially here, when it is not a debt of 
 justice, but only of charity and mercy," &c. &c. 
 
 Concerning Recovery or Compensation. (90.) 
 
 " What is compensation ? 
 
 *' Ans. It is called in law, a mutual settling of debt and 
 credit. It may be done in two ways, either by retaining so 
 much, or by privately taking so much from the property of 
 a debtor as the debtor owes. 
 
 " How manifold is compensation ? 
 
 " Ans. Twofold ; namely, manifest and secret. 
 
 " What is manifest compensation ? 
 
 " Ans. It is a mutual settling of debt and credit with a 
 Jcnotvledge of the debtor: for instance, John owes Peter 100 
 for clothing, and Peter owes John 100 for wine; debt and 
 credit are compensated, and satisfaction is made to both. 
 
 " Is manifest compensation always lawful ? 
 
 *' Ans. If the question is asked concerning retaining pro- 
 perty due to another, because another owes me an equal 
 amount, such compensation is lawful. 
 
 " It is also lawful to recover one's property in revenge of 
 an act of theft, or when it is not yet put away in a safe 
 place ; because this has the plea of just defence : and what 
 is more, many authors say, that this is lawfully done with 
 moderate force, if the thing to be recovered is plainly in 
 sight, and cannot otherwise be recovered ; only let there be 
 no scandal and other improprieties. 
 
 " But if a thing owned by another is manifestly taken, be- 
 cause the other owes that thing or an equivalent, such com- 
 pensation is ordinarily unlawful ; because it is contrary to 
 the order of justice, and calculated to disturb the public 
 peace. 
 
 " What compensation is called secret ? 
 
 " Ans. That which is made without the knowledge of 
 
CONCERNING THEFT AND RAPINE. 253 
 
 the debtor. But it may be done in a threefold manner : 1st. 
 By recovering one's property in the whole, unjustly kept 
 back' by another. 2d. By privately stealing from the debtor 
 an equivalent to the amount due, if he will not pay or make 
 restitution. 3d. By secretly retaining from the goods of the 
 debtor so much as he owes me. 
 
 " Is secret compensation lawful ? 
 
 " Ans. St. Thomas, Art. 5. ad. 3., says : ' But he who by 
 stealth takes his own property, unjustly kept back by an- 
 other, sins indeed, not because he wrongs him who detains 
 it, (and therefore he is not obliged to make any restitution or 
 recompense,) but he sins against common justice, when he 
 usurps to himself the judgment of his own case, passing by the 
 established order of law. And therefore he is bound to make 
 satisfaction to God, and to take care that the scandal among 
 his neighbours, if any should thence arise, may be allayed.' 
 
 " Hence Steyaert maintains that it is always unlawful, in 
 Appendix, Controv. 4, &c. 
 
 " Besides, although the offence against the common law 
 might sometimes be only a venial sin, yet other serious dis- 
 orders are liable to follow, as scandal, infamy, risk of dou- 
 ble payment, danger of frequent abuse against the common 
 good, &c. ; hence most authors, even those who defend it as 
 lawful, say that it is dangerous in practice ; and therefore, 
 generally, the contrary is to be recommended. 
 
 " Yet Sylvius, Wiggers, de Cocq, Billuart, Collet, &c., 
 teach that it may be lawful through circumstances, the fol- 
 lowing conditions being laid down : 
 
 " 1. That the debt is certain and apparent, or that it is 
 certainly agreed that the property is yours. Also, that it is 
 due from justice, not from charity or any other virtue. 
 
 " 2. That it cannot be recovered by any other method ; 
 for instance, by way of the law, except with great difficulty 
 and inconvenience. 
 
 " 3. That there is no danger of scandal and infamy : lest, 
 for instance, he may be regarded as a thief by recovering in 
 this way. 
 
 " 4. That care must be taken lest the debtor in this way, 
 should pay or restore twice. 
 
 " 5. That a thing is taken the same in kind if it can be 
 
254 CONCERNING THEFT AND RAPINE. 
 
 done, and that no injury is done to a third person by taking 
 his property ; for instance, if lent to the debtor. 
 
 " 6. That compensation be not made from the property of 
 a debtor deposited with a creditor, or from something lent : 
 for this the laws forbid (Chap. Good faith respecting De- 
 posit) : nor can this compensation be made from property 
 due to the stale or governor : v. g., from tolls ; thus also, he 
 who has been condemned to give money or anything else, 
 cannot use compensation. 
 
 " 7. In order to avoid the difficulty of objections, Billuart 
 adds, that it is requisite that all these things are ascertained, 
 not by the private judgment of the person taking compensa- 
 tion, but in the opinion of some prudent man : lest iniquity 
 should lie to itself. 
 
 " But so many conditions and cautions, which can scarcely 
 ever all be afforded, justly argue the weakness of this opinion : 
 besides, the reason of St. Thomas always militates against 
 it, that the person compensating himself sins against common 
 justice, when he usurps to himself the judgment of his own 
 case, neglecting the established order of the law. 
 
 " Whatever this may be, it is certain, however, that ser- 
 vants, although in fact they might receive less pay than the 
 labour which they undergo is worth, yet may not on that 
 account avail themselves of secret compensation ; as is plain 
 from this 37th proposition, condemned by Innocent XI. ; ' ser- 
 vants and house-girls may secretly steal from their masters 
 for the compensation of their labour, which they deem 
 greater than the salary which they receive;' and authors 
 extend this even to the case in which a servant has been 
 compelled by poverty, &c., to serve for too little wages." 
 
 Concerning Small Thefts, (91.) 
 
 " It has been said. No. 88, that theft from its very nature 
 is a mortal sin : yet it may be venial from the imperfect de- 
 liberation of the act, and the triflmg value of the matter. 
 
 " Is theft always venial, when the matter which is taken 
 away is trifling ? 
 
 *' Ans. No : for it may become mortal in seven ways, 
 just as any sin whatever, venial on account of the smallness 
 of the matter, can become mortal ; as may be seen, from 
 No. 165, &c. 
 
' CONCERNING THEFT AND RAPINE. 255 
 
 " Yet a theft, trifling as to matter, becomes mortal, prin- 
 cipally in the three following ways : 
 
 "1. He sins mortally, who takes away a trifling matter, 
 having the will, desire, or intention of taking away a valu- 
 able article, if opportunity were afforded. 
 
 " 2. Any one sins mortally as often as he takes away a 
 thing of little value, intending by many small thefts to reach 
 a considerable sum, thus, v. g. he who from an intention of 
 stealing 5 florins should have taken away at each time one 
 farthing, would have committed up to that time 100 mortal 
 sins : the reason is, because each theft proceeds from a bad 
 intention. 
 
 " Daelman with some others maintains that many such 
 thefts continually committed constitute one mortal theft, be- 
 cause they flow from one and the same prevailing, uninter- 
 rupted intention ; but practically the thing amounts to the 
 same, because this one is equivalent to many. 
 
 " 3. Although any one should not have the intention 
 either of taking away anything valuable, nor yet intend by 
 small amounts to reach a considerable sum, yet he who often 
 steals small amounts from one or even from different per- 
 sons, sins mortally from the very circumstance that he 
 makes up the same, perceiving, or being able and in duty 
 bound to perceive, that it would reach a considerable 
 amount. And hence the previous acts will be venial sins 
 from the trifling value of the matter ; but the act by which 
 the amount is completed, sufficient for a mortal sin, will be 
 mortal : because this last act is regarded as pertaining to an 
 important amount, for the reason that the previous amounts 
 coalesce with the last ; and thus by willing the last, he by 
 inference wills the former amounts. 
 
 " For the same reason, it must be said, that if, v. g. a 
 person by the ninth trifling theft shall have completed an im- 
 portant amount, he will have sinned mortally, and he again 
 sins mortally by adding the tenth trifling theft, and so of the 
 rest, &c. 
 
 " In relation to this subject, this 38th proposition has been 
 condemned by Innocent XI. ' A person is not bound under 
 pain of mortal sin to restore what has been taken away by 
 small thefts, however great the sum may be.' 
 
 "From what has been said, you will infer, that innkeep- 
 
256 CONCERNING THEFT AND RAPINE. 
 
 ers, merchants, or those who keep a shop, who defraud in 
 number, weight, or measure, even if at,each time, they may- 
 intend to steal only something trifling, yet at each time sin 
 mortally, because their intention is by such frauds to reach 
 a considerable sum. Even if from the beginning they may 
 not have had this intention, they still sin mortally every 
 time after they have completed an important amount. 
 
 " Many authors say that a greater quantity of matter is 
 requisite in order to be mortal, when things are taken away 
 by small thefts from different persons, or from the same per- 
 son at different times : but Braunman rejects this as perni- 
 cious in practice : because, in order to be mortal, a considera- 
 ble absolute quantity of loss, or of another's property which 
 is unjustly detained, is sufficient. 
 
 " When each one of several persons causes a loss to the 
 same person, which, when taken together, is serious, do the 
 amounts coalesce 1 
 
 " Ans. No : unless they mutually co-operate. See Dael- 
 man, &c. 
 
 " Is he who takes a considerable sum by small thefts, bound 
 under mortal sin to restore the whole ? 
 
 " Ans. No : but in order to be free from the mor- 
 tal SIN OF unjust detention, IT IS SUFFICIENT TO MAKE 
 RESTITUTION SO FAR THAT WHAT HE RETAINS MAY NO 
 LONGER BE A SERIOUS AMOUNT. 
 
 " Yet authors remark that this is dangerous in practice : 
 and hence confessors, in regard to all thieves, should be in- 
 exorable, and oblige the penitents to the restitution of all, even 
 the minutest thefts ; in order that thus they may more effi- 
 caciously be deterred from greater. 
 
 " How to proceed practically with him, who confesses that 
 he has stolen, may be seen in Schema 7, in the volume con- 
 cerning Penance." 
 
 Concerning the thefts of certain persons in particular. 
 (92.) 
 
 "What is to be thought concerning thefts of children from 
 the property of their parents ? 
 
 " If the son steals a considerable amount from parents 
 who are seriously unwilling, it is certain that he sins mor- 
 tally. 
 
CONCERNING THEFT AND RAPINE. 257 
 
 " It is said, a considerahle amount : because all admit 
 that the quantity of the matter should be greater in this case 
 to constitute a mortal sin, that when something is taken away 
 from strangers : the reason of which is, that children have a 
 certain remote right to the property of parents, which after 
 death ought to devolve to themselves : also, because parents 
 are usually not so unwilling. 
 
 " It is said, from parents who are seriously unwilling: 
 with respect to which it must be observed, that they either 
 are unwilling only as to the manner of stealing it, or that 
 they are unwilling also as to the amount taken away. 
 
 " If they are unwilling only as to the manner, it is usually 
 admitted that a greater quantity is required in order to the 
 commission of mortal sin in respect to the amount, than when 
 they are unwilling as to the value : it is also admitted that if 
 the manner only is displeasing, not the act itself, there arises 
 no necessity for restitution. 
 
 " But when parents are at the same time unwilling as re- 
 gards the value, and the quantity is pretty considerable, chil- 
 dren are not to be excused from mortal sin, nor from the 
 obligation of making restitution. 
 
 " With respect to such cases, the condition of the pf./ents 
 should be considered, whether they are wealthy, or whether 
 they are in straitened circumstances, &c. : also, the age of 
 the children, and the purpose for which they consu.ne what 
 they have stolen : the custom of the place is also to be re- 
 garded, or what parents of such a condition may be accus- 
 tomed to concede to their children in such a yjlacj. 
 
 " The method which a child takes in stealirig, is also to 
 be principally considered : whether, v. g., by breaking open 
 chests, by collecting debts in the name of parents under a 
 false seal, for instance, by receiving the returns of revenues 
 due to parents, &c. 
 
 " Practically, for the most part, they ought to be obliged 
 to make some restitution, or to ask pardon, although the 
 parents might be unwilling only as to the mode : because 
 this is the best remedy against a relapse. 
 
 " If a son is under obligation to restore something consi- 
 derable to his parents, and is not able, then he is to be com- 
 pelled to permit so much to be subtracted from his portion in 
 22 
 
258 CONCERNING THEFT AND RAPINE. 
 
 the division of the inheritance : unless the parents should in 
 a valid manner remit the restitution. 
 
 " May a husband commit theft upon a wife, and vice versa, 
 a wife upon a husband? 
 
 " Ans, Yes : he, if against the consent of his wife, he 
 squanders property, the control of which belongs to her : 
 such as dowry, &c. : but the wife, in more instances commits 
 theft, by taking, secretly, and without the consent of her hus- 
 band, their common property. Yet it ought to be understood 
 what things are permitted to wives, according to the custom 
 of the place ; for instance, in order to give alms, to help poor 
 relations, for decent ornament, &c. 
 
 " Even parents themselves sometimes commit theft upon 
 their children, by stealing from the military property, whose 
 control and administration belongs to the children. 
 
 " Servants and maids, very often sin by theft, when, for 
 instance, they avail themselves of secret compensation, as 
 was said No. 90 : also, if they do not perform the work which 
 is due ; which ought also to be taken into consideration with 
 regard to other labourers. 
 
 " Besides, they sin by theft, in proportion to the value of 
 the thing, when they convert to their own use, costly articles 
 of food and drink, or things which are usually denied to 
 them : unless the consent of the master can be presumed, at 
 least as regards the amount taken away ; for instance, if the 
 master, knowing it, does not say anything to the contrary, or 
 readily grants permission, when asked, &c. 
 
 *' However, masters are usually extremely unwilling that 
 servants should steal such things in order to give or sell to 
 strangers: authors likewise are of opinion that they sin 
 grievously, if, without the consent of their masters, they give 
 to the poor, goods to a considerable amount. 
 
 " An aggravating circumstance in this matter is, if ser- 
 vants carry off" a thing committed to their care. 
 
 " What is to be thought concerning thefts, which servants 
 commit in feeding cattle ; for instance, by giving them more 
 than the master wished, or those things, which he has for- 
 bidden them to give ? 
 
 " Ans. These are sins and common enough : and if from 
 this cause a considerable loss should accrue in the household 
 affairs, it is a mortal sin, and restitution i^s a duty. 
 
CONCERNING THEFT AND RAPINE. 259 
 
 " But if the cattle are so much improved, that the loss is 
 as it were compensated, they will not be obliged to make 
 restitution, nor will they so easily sin mortally. 
 
 " Persons attached to religious orders, in this respect are 
 nearly similar to the children of a family, so that they com- 
 mit thefi: if they dispose of anything against the consent of 
 the superiors : but besides they sin by the offence of sacri- 
 lege against the vow of poverty. 
 
 " The universal admonition of authors is that in such 
 thefts there should be no dissembling, lest they should be 
 multiplied; although it might be evident that the owners 
 were unwilling only as to the mode of taking; but that 
 some restitution is always to be enjoined, or asking pardon, 
 or that they make amends for what has been done amiss by 
 more diligent care and labour." 
 
 It need scarcely be said that the preceding sections con- 
 tain principles, which must inevitably lead to licentiousness 
 and dishonesty. The theology of the Romish Church 
 teaches that the theft of an article of small value is a venial 
 offence ; and farther, that if the person who is robbed is not 
 very unwilling to be defrauded, the sin is but a little one. 
 Is this the morality of the Bible? Does Jesus Christ teach 
 such doctrine as this ? No ; but he says, " He that is un- 
 just in the least, is unjust also in much.'''' It stands to rea- 
 son that the man who will violate the dictates of his con- 
 science for a small inducement will feel very little scruple 
 about transgressing the law of God when the incentive is 
 greater. If he pleads in extenuation of his guilt that he has 
 yielded to a small temptation, and that he has stolen an 
 article of but little value, who that is possessed of common 
 sense would trust him in a matter which presents strong in- 
 ducements to dishonesty ? If he could not resist the former, 
 how is he to overcome the latter ? The very weakness of the 
 temptation aggravates his guilt. The Romish Church weighs 
 guilt not by the balance of the gospel, but in scales of her 
 own invention, and her false weights are an abomination to 
 
260 CONCERNING THEFT AND RAPINE. 
 
 the Lord ! What can be more execrable than the principle 
 that the guilt of an offender is to be ascertained from the 
 feelings, with which the injured person resents the trespass 
 committed against him 1 If the individual defrauded is a 
 benevolent and merciful man, and is grieved more on ac- 
 count of the manner than the amount of the injury, then 
 the offence is venial ! But if he is a churlish Nabal, a very 
 son of Belial, whose God is his belly, then the guilt of the 
 offender is greatly aggravated ! Was there ever a more pre- 
 posterous doctrine palmed upon the simplicity of foolish men 
 by the arch-deceiver of souls? 
 
 Every instance of theft, no matter how small soever the 
 amount may be, is an offence committed, not only, nor even 
 principally against man, but against that God who has said, 
 " Thou shalt not steal." The claims of God's law are al- 
 most entirely overlooked in Peter Dens' casuistry ; the guilt 
 of the transgressor is enhanced or mitigated by considera- 
 tions drawn almost exclusively from human conceptions of 
 justice; and every honest man must admit that our author's 
 deductions are not very honourable either to himself or to 
 the pious fraternity, who are trained under his tuition ! 
 
 But I must call the attention of my reader to the transla- 
 tion furnished in the Doway Bible of Prov. vi. 30. " The 
 fault is not so great, when a man hath stolen, for he stealeth 
 to fill his hungry soul." The translation in the Protestant 
 Bible reads thus : " Men do not despise a thief, if he steal 
 to satisfy his soul, when he is hungry." In the Greek 
 Septuagint it is 'Ou ^au/xajov iav aXw ris xXsVtwv, xXeVtsj 
 yot^ I'va i^'ff\7}(Syi r'^v '^v)(rjv crsjvwv ; literally, " It is not won- 
 derful if one is caught stealing, for he steals in order that he 
 may fill his soul being hungry." This differs somewhat 
 from the Doway text, " The fault is not so great when a 
 man hath stolen ; for he stealeth to fill his hungry soul." In 
 the original, the degree of the guilt of theft is not the ques- 
 tion, but the strength of the peculiar temptation ; and hence 
 
CONCERNING THEFT AND RAFINE. 2G1 
 
 the Doway text is rather objectionable ; and as for the com- 
 ment of tlie divine St. Thomas " that the necessity inducing 
 to theft diminishes^ or totally removes the fault," it 
 is ahogether Romish. Solomon is comparing the temptation 
 to which the starving man is exposed with that to which he 
 yields who commits adultery. Even when the theft is com- 
 mitted in order to satisfy the cravings of hunger, the guilt 
 remains ; hence it is said in the very next verse that the of- 
 fender shall restore seven-fold ; he shall give all the sub- 
 stance of his house, (ver. 31.) Solomon seems to have been 
 ignorant of the doctrine that in extreme necessity all things 
 ARE COMMON. Though a man is starving, he has no right 
 to steal — he had better die than disobey the law of God. 
 Let him use the lawful means, which God has put within his 
 reach ; and he who feeds the ravens, and hunts for the young 
 lion, will never suffer the righteous to perish with hunger. 
 " Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, 
 and all these things shall be added unto you." The object 
 of insisting upon the above translation, probably is to glean a 
 little more argument for the propriety of the Romish distinc- 
 tion between mortal and venial sin. 
 
 The attempt to establish the amount necessary to consti- 
 tute theft a mortal offence, and all the reasoning in relation 
 to that point, are ineffably ridiculous ! " The daily wages 
 of a man labouring in some honourable trade is sufficient." 
 Supposing then that three or four shillings, the amount spe- 
 cified by this discriminating divine, are equivalent to one dol- 
 lar of our money, then the thief who purloins 99f cents 
 commits a venial offence; but he who takes a quarter of a 
 cent more, and thus completes the dollar, is guilty of mortal 
 sin ! ! Oh ! tempora ! oh ! mores ! 
 
 Then, too, the cases in which restitution is to be made are 
 
 peculiar. If a man in extreme necessity has stolen " wine, 
 
 bread, &c., he ought to restore nothing, even if, after suffering 
 
 want, he should come into better fortune !" The old law was, 
 
 22 * 
 
 I" 
 
262 OF SUICIDE. 
 
 that when a man stole, even " to satisfy his hungry soul," " he 
 shall restore seven-fold ; he shall give all the substance of 
 his house ;" but of course the law of the Bible has nothing 
 to do with the Popish code of morals. 
 
 Again : He who takes a considerable sum by small thefts 
 is bound to restore only so much, that the amount which he 
 retains may no longer be serious ! ! And although a kind 
 of caveat is inserted that this is dangerous in practice, ac- 
 cording to some authors, and that penitents should be obliged 
 to make restitution, even of the smallest thefts ; yet this is 
 enjoined only on the ground of expediency^ not because it is 
 an absolute obligation ! 
 
 The sum and substance of the whole chapter is briefly 
 this, that if Protestant parents wish to have their children 
 effectually trained up as candidates for the penitentiary, we 
 recommend to them the schools in which the morals of Peter 
 Dens are inculcated. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 The sections which treat of injuries committed against 
 the good name of another, and of the restitution which is 
 due in such cases, I shall omit. The 119th sect, treats 
 
 Of injuries against the body of a neighbour. 
 
 OF SUICIDE. 
 
 " There are various means by which injury is inflicted on 
 the body of a neighbour ; namely, suicide, homicide, muti- 
 lation, adultery, incest, fornication, rape, and the things which 
 are included in these, as duelling, abortion, whipping, im- 
 prisonment, &c., which are forbidden respectively by the 
 fifth (i. e., the sixth) commandment of the Decalogue: 
 ' Thou shall not kill ;' or by the sixth, (seventh,) ' Thou shall 
 not commit adultery.' 
 
OF SUICIDE. 263 
 
 " What is suicide ? 
 
 " Suicide i's, ivhen any one withovt the command or per- 
 mission of the divine authority inflicts death upon himself. 
 
 "Is it lawful to kill one's self? 
 
 " Ans. To kill one's self directly and intentionally, with- 
 out divine authority, is a most grievous sin. 
 
 "It is proved, 1. from the command, * Thou shalt not 
 kill ;' for if it is not permitted by the force of this command- 
 ment to kill a neighbour, much less one's self; as every one 
 is nearest to himself. 
 
 " 2. To kill one's self is contrary to the inclination of 
 nature ; because every thing preserves and guards itself 
 against harm ; but no exception against this inclination 
 ought to be admitted, unless it is clear that it has been made 
 by the author of nature. 
 
 " The suicide therefore sins against God, who has reserved 
 to himself the power of life and death ; he. sins also against 
 the state, a member of which he takes away without her 
 consent : and against himself by violating the law of pre- 
 serving his own life, which was granted to him by God 
 never to be abrogated ; also, by offending against charity, 
 by which every one is bound to love himself. 
 
 " St. Jerome, writing on Jonas, Ch. i., seems to teach that 
 it is lawful to kill one's self for the preservatior; of chastity : 
 but in this point we must, with St. Augustine and St. Thomas, 
 differ from him, &c. 
 
 " As for the Holy Virgins, who are said to have killed 
 themselves lest they should be violated, it must be said, with 
 St. Augustine, that they did it by the direction of the 
 Holy Spirit. Some excuse them by reason of ignorance, 
 which, in regard to them, could be at least not very criminal. 
 
 " As to the direction of the Holy Spirit, or divine authority 
 to kill one's self or others, Peter Marchantius correctly ad- 
 monishes that it cannot be presumed, but ought to be most 
 clearly evident ; because, in such cases, fraud and illusion 
 of the devil may easily intervene. 
 
 " From these remarks it is plain, that acts in themselves 
 fatal, are never lawful against one's self, those which in 
 themselves and their own nature tend to death : as cutting 
 the throat, strangling, taking poison, &c. 
 
264 OF SUICIDE. 
 
 '* Can a judge who is guilty of death lawfully kill himself, 
 as he can kill others? 
 
 " Ans. No ; because that judge is not a judge of himself, 
 but must be judged by others. 
 
 " Can a judge condemn any criminal to kill himself? 
 
 " Ans. The negative answer seems proper : because such 
 power is not necessary to the state, as other modes of 
 punishing criminals are supplied : nor is it clear that God 
 has granted this power to the state. 
 
 " Hence authors teach that a person condemned to die of 
 hunger, cannot abstain from food secretly offered, nor take 
 the poison which he might be condemned to take. 
 
 " Is it lawful to leap into a river, in which a man must 
 certainly be drowned, in order to baptize an infant, which 
 would otherwise die without baptism ? 
 
 "Ans. No: because the immediate effect ofsuch a leap would 
 be his own death ; and the baptism of the child by no means 
 follows from this, but only from the application of the matter 
 and form. We are indeed bound, in order to succour such 
 a child to expose ourselves to risk of death ; but it is one 
 thing to expose one's self to the danger of death, and another 
 to kill one's self. 
 
 " Is it lawful to leap from a tower on fire, in order to 
 avoid the severer pains of burning, when in either case there 
 is no hope of escaping death ? 
 
 " Ans. Yes, probably : at least then, if by leaping from 
 the tower he does not accelerate his death ; the reason is, 
 because that leap is immediately an escape of a greater evil, 
 namely, a more painful death ; and hence it seems that per- 
 missively he may have recourse to the less painful death 
 which follows from it." 
 
 Whenever any of the traditions or doctrines of Holy 
 Church are contradicted by the moral law, or are plainly 
 at variance with opinions now generally received, an expla- 
 nation is always at hand. If the saintship of any of the 
 gods or goddesses of Rome is rendered problematical by the 
 manner of their lives or their death, some Father is prepared 
 with a pious suggestion, and this is at once received as per- 
 fectly satisfactory ; v. g., the Holy Virgins who committed 
 
OF SUICIDE. 265 
 
 suicide, and who are invoked with great fervour by their ad- 
 mirers, killed themselves by the direction of the Holy 
 Spirit. Thus God is made to suspend the operation even 
 of his moral law in order to preserve the idols of Rome 
 from suspicion ! If this is not blasphemous presumption, 
 what crime is there which deserves the name? 
 
 Of all the cases of conscience that ever tormented a 
 casuist, surely there are few so perplexing as that which is 
 proposed towards the close of the last section, relative to the 
 immersion of an infant which is in danger of dying without 
 baptism ! 
 
 Of Indirect Suicide. (120.) 
 
 *' Is it lawful to kill one's self indirectly, or to do or ne- 
 glect any thing from which, though not intended, death may 
 follow 1 
 
 " Ans. In itself considered, no : because death would thus 
 certainly be voluntary in the cause, or might be so construed ; 
 and therefore it is sinful, unless a sufficient reason for so 
 doing is afforded. 
 
 "Therefore, they are guilty of suicide, 1. who, for trifling 
 reasons, expose themselves to danger of death : as, for in- 
 stance, fool-hardy rope-dancers, or such as take poisons for 
 the sake of vain-glory, unless they know how to meet the 
 danger by means of an antidote, so that it may be morally 
 removed. 
 
 " 2. They who accelerate death by surfeit, drunkenness, 
 drinking heated wine, immoderate passions, &c. 
 
 " 3. Sick persons refusing ordinary remedies, which would 
 probably be an advantage, and would not do any harm, if 
 there is danger of death from their neglect. 
 
 "It is to be observed that the abovementioned persons sin 
 so much the more as they accelerate death, and so long as 
 they are in this state of grievously injuring themselves, so 
 long are they in constant mortahsin, and unworthy of abso- 
 lution. 
 
 " Do they sin, who shorten their days through austerities? 
 
 " Ans. It is a rare thing that days are shortened by 
 moderate austerity of life, but life is rather prolonged. Be- 
 
266 OF SUICIDE. 
 
 sides, although certain austerities might abbreviate life some- 
 what, yet if they are moderate they are lawful : because the 
 subjection of the flesh, and the manifold spiritual advantage, 
 which immediately accrue from it, overcome this bad effect ; 
 this, also, the common experience of the Saints proves. 
 
 " Yet immoderate austerities are unlawful as fatal to a 
 person. Nor is there ever any need of them for primary 
 purposes. But those are regarded as immoderate under 
 which nature cannot be sustained, or a person is rendered 
 unable properly to perform his duties : and so far are they 
 from producing the effect that by them the body is subjected 
 to the Spirit, that it is rather hindered from obeying the Spirit 
 on account of languor. 
 
 " It is to be observed, 1st. from the Saints, Philip Nerius, 
 and Francis Sales, that they are to be more highly esteemed, 
 who, mortifying the flesh with the moderation of reason, are 
 wholly devoted to correcting the understanding, and subject- 
 ing and conforming their own will to the divine, than they, 
 who neglecting the care of the mind wish to afflict the body 
 alone. 
 
 " 2d. That in undergoing austerities, every one depends 
 upon the suggestion and direction of his own confessor, not- 
 withstanding any private imagination and will. 
 
 " It was said at the commencement of this number, unless 
 a sufficient reason for so doing is afforded ; and hence a 
 pastor administering the Sacraments to persons infected with 
 the plague with' the risk of contagion, the soldier continuing 
 in his station at the peril of his life for the common good, 
 &c., are not to be blamed, but very greatly commended. 
 
 " For a similar reason, the soldier does not sin, who first 
 ascends the wall, and sets fire to a train of powder in order 
 to overthrow a tower, although he sees that he will certainly 
 be killed in consequence. 
 
 " He also appears probably excusable, who being placed 
 on an enemy's ship sets fire to a train of powder in order 
 that the ship and the enemy may perish, even with his own 
 certain destruction, if the liberty of his country may accrue 
 from it ; the case is otherwise, if it would not ensue, for this 
 reason, for instance, that many other ships of the enemy 
 might still remain. 
 
 " Yet that soldier would be culpable, who should do the 
 
OF SUICIDE. 267 
 
 same remaining in his own ship, in order that he himself 
 with the ship may not come into the power of the enemy, 
 &c. 
 
 " May or ought a person about to be condemned, or 
 already condemned, flee from prison if he can do it without 
 violence ? 
 
 " If he should be innocent, he would properly be bound to 
 make his escape : unless the good of the state or of religion 
 should otherwise advise : thus many martyrs, although they 
 could escape, remained in prison. 
 
 " But if he is guilty, it is commonly taught, that such a 
 one may flee, but yet that he is not obliged to escape : that 
 he is not obliged to flee, is proved from this, that death would 
 not ensue from his failing to escape, but from the crime which 
 he has committed : yea, more, it is believed that a criminal 
 may, of his own accord, give himself up to the judge, that he 
 may make satisfaction to God and the republic. 
 
 " That he may escape, is proved from this, that flight is 
 the means of preserving life : but he would too much repugn 
 his natural inclination, if it were not lawful to avail himself 
 of such means : and hence some believe that to this end, he 
 may even break from jail and confinement. 
 
 " He is not considered a suicide who permits himself to be 
 killed, because he cannot preserve his life, except by extra- 
 ordinary means; for instance, by the most costly medicines, 
 the severest pains, &c. : thus, also, a monk is not obliged to 
 go out of the cloister, that he may get a change of air, for 
 the sake of obtaining health. 
 
 " Whether a Carthusian is obliged, at the risk of life, 
 to abstain from eating meats, see resolved. No. 46, concern- 
 ing the Laws, &c." 
 
 I will here insert the chapter to which allusion is made in 
 the last paragraph. 
 
 Concerning the obligation of the constitution of the Carthu- 
 siahs. (No. 46, Vol. II., p. 82.) 
 
 " Is the constitution of the Carthusians, by which all eat- 
 ing of meats is forbidden, under mortal sin, obligatory when 
 life is in extreme danger ? 
 
 " Ans. If other articles of food are not at hand, they 
 
268 OF SUICIDE. 
 
 eat meats lawfully ; indeed they are obliged to eat them, 
 lest they may perish of hunger : because their constitution 
 cannot include this case, as it cannot oblige them to perish 
 with hunger. The case would be the same, if there were no 
 other except poisoned articles of food at hand ; because these 
 are not naturally adapted to sustain life. 
 
 " But if other articles of food may be supplied, it is not 
 lawful for them to eat meats, even if in the judgment of phy- 
 sicians the eating of them would be necessary for the pre- 
 servation of life. The reason is, because their constitutions, 
 approved by the church, most strictly forbid the eating of 
 meat : and the ancient custom of this order teaches that this 
 prohibition holds good even in this case. 
 
 " Besides, this rigour is necessary for the preservation of 
 the strength and honour of this institution, which would easily 
 decline, if a dispensation should be granted even in a single 
 instance, as the event has frequently shown in other religious 
 orders, and also sometimes in this itself: which Vasquey re- 
 cords that he had himself heard from the strictest fathers of 
 this order. 
 
 " Ohj. A Carthusian who has no food except meats, is 
 obliged to feed on meats, as was said above : but when he 
 cannot preserve life without meats, it is the same to him as 
 if he could have no other food : therefore, he then lawfully 
 eats meat. 
 
 *' Ans. I deny the minor : for although other articles of 
 food might be thought not advantageous, yet certainly they 
 are sufficient in themselves, and serve to sustain life : and 
 hence, although the sick man may perhaps die from the 
 disease, yet he cannot be said to die of hunger : and there- 
 fore it is not the same as if no food was at hand : therefore, 
 the eating of meats in this case can only be regarded as 
 medicine ; but just as a sick man is not obliged to procure 
 the most costly medicines, although others may seem of no 
 advantage, so neither is the Carthusian obliged to eat meats, 
 which would be very injurious to his order, by relaxing dis- 
 cipline, &c." 
 
 To most of the preceding chapters, I have thought it ad- 
 visable to subjoin short refutations of the erroneous and un- 
 scriptural principles, which are inculcated in the theology of 
 
OF SUICIDE. 269 
 
 the Romish Church ; but it will not he necessary to offer one 
 word of comment, when the poison is so rank, that no sane 
 man would touch it, and my readers will therefore under- 
 stand why it is that in subsequent chapters, I shall often re- 
 frain entirely from commenting upon the text, which Peter 
 Dens offers. Whenever there is anything so specious that 
 an honest man might be deceived, I shall feel it my" duty, for 
 the sake of those who may not always be prepared to sepa- 
 rate the precious from the vile, to furnish suggestions, which 
 will perhaps not be altogether unprofitable. 
 
 Not a few of the subjects upon which we are about to enter 
 are of a somewhat delicate nature, and in many instances I 
 shall therefore be obliged to condense and give a mere out- 
 line, in order that details, offensive to modesty, may be 
 avoided. I wish to present a fair and full exposition of the 
 principles, which are inculcated in Romish Seminaries, in so 
 far as I can accomplish it without defiling my pages with 
 anything indecent or obscene ; at the same time, however, I 
 shall not suffer myself to be hampered by prudery, or false 
 modesty ; I shall spread before Protestants and Papists, so 
 much of the theology (/) of Romish priests, that it will be an 
 easy matter for an ordinary imagination to supply as much 
 of the suppressed matter as a decent person would choose to 
 know. But whilst 'endeavouring to present my reader with a 
 correct idea of Peter Dens' theology, I shall not designedly 
 pander to the depraved curiosity of any vicious mind. 
 
 23 
 
270 OF HOMICIDE. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVir. 
 
 OF HOMICIDE. (No. 122.) 
 
 " What is homicide ? 
 
 " It is the voluntary and unjust killing of a person. It 
 is forbidden both by natural and by positive and divine law, 
 * Thou shalt not kill.' 
 
 "Is the killing of irrational animals also forbidden by the 
 command, * Thou shalt not kill V 
 
 " No. For God, Gen. ix. 3., has expressly permitted this : 
 ''Every thing that moveth and liveth shall be meat for you.' 
 
 " St. Thomas observes that by killing animals in a cryel 
 manner a certain impropriety may be committed ; for ani- 
 mals have been left not for our cruelty but for our use. This 
 cruelty Sacred Scripture also condemns ; Prov. xii. 10. * The 
 just regardeth the lives of his beasts ; but the bowels of the 
 wicked are cruel.' 
 
 " Whether the eating of meats was permitted before the 
 deluge, is disputed : Sylvius thinks that it was permitted, but 
 
 THAT THE MORE RELIGIOUS ABSTAINED FROM IT. 
 
 *' Explain the command, * Thou shalt not kill.' 
 
 " By this command, not only homicide is forbidden, but 
 also mutilation, wounding, whipping, &c., and whatever tends 
 to the injury of a neighbour's person. 
 
 " Indirectly, gentleness, patience, peace, love, beneficence, 
 &c., are enjoined, as the Roman catechism explains, part 3., 
 concerning the fifth precept of the decalogue. 
 
 " Is every killing of a person, under all circumstances, 
 forbidden by this precept? 
 
 " No : but that which is committed by private authority, 
 without either the command or permission of God : hence, 
 in the definition of homicide, it was said that it is the unjust 
 killing of a person. 
 
 " What killing of a person is not forbidden by this pre- 
 cept? 
 
 "That which is done by divine authority : Thus, 1. Abra- 
 
OF HOMICIDE. 271 
 
 ham did not sin, who, at the command of God, was willing 
 to kill his own son Isaac, Gen. ch. xxii. ver. 10. 
 
 " 2. Nor does the state, which puts malefactors to death : 
 as God has likewise given this power to the state for the com- 
 mon good, as will be proved in the following number. 
 
 " 3. Nor they who wage war justly by slaying the ene- 
 mies : for Sacred Scripture, the fathers, and the practice of 
 the most conscientious rulers abundantly prove that this pow- 
 er has been divinely given. The conditions of a just war, 
 see briefly in the Analogy of Becanus, ch. xviii., quest. 1." 
 
 " Is it lawful to Mil malefactors hy puhlic authority ? 
 (No. 122.) 
 
 "It is not only lawful, but it is also commanded by pub- 
 lic authority and due process of law to put to death criminals 
 who are hurtful to the state : such as robbers, incendiaries, 
 sacrilegious persons, thieves, &c. This was enacted in the 
 Third Lateran Council against the Waldenses. 
 
 " It is proved from the divine permission granted, Exod. 
 xxii. 18. 'Wizards thou shalt not suffer to live.' And Rom. 
 xiii. 4. * If thou do that which is evil, fear : for he beareth 
 not the sword in vain, for he is the minister of God, an aven- 
 ger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.' 
 
 " Add to this also natural reason, which dictates that a 
 limb must be amputated, when by it the destruction of the 
 whole body is threatened : but from these pernicious male- 
 factors there is danger of the corruption and disturbance of 
 the state ; therefore, &c. 
 
 " May the state at its option put to death any malefactors 
 whatever ? 
 
 " No : but only such as are very injurious to the state : 
 and hence, in this case, the grievousness or malice of the 
 sin, in itself considered, is not to be regarded, but the injury 
 which it occasions to the republic. 
 
 " Hence the military laws are just, which decree the pen- 
 alty of death for faults in themselves slight, for trifling dis- 
 obedience, neglecting trust, petty theft, &c. ; because from 
 faults of this kind, although they are in themselves trifling, 
 he most grievous evils might arise to the state, unless they 
 were most strictly forbidden. 
 
I 
 
 272 OF HOMICIDE. 
 
 " Is it lawful to put a man to death for mere theft ? 
 
 " Yes : when this is seriously pernicious to the state : and 
 this the practice of tribunals approves. 
 
 " Nor is it any matter that the punishment seems dispro- 
 portioned to the offence, when any one is deprived of life on 
 account of the loss of temporal property ; for from what has 
 been said before, it may be observed that the punishment is 
 not inflicted for the theft of another man's property, in itself 
 considered, but for the sake of the injury which is inflicted 
 on the peace and tranquillity of the state. 
 
 " Ohj. St. Thomas says, &c. : ' For a theft which does 
 not inflict an irreparable loss, the penalty of death is not in- 
 flicted according to present judgment, except the theft is ag- 
 gravated by some important circumstance.' 
 
 " Ans. St. Thomas only says that in his time, according 
 to the old imperial laws, mere thefts were not punished with 
 death. 
 
 " Many authors accuse Scotus in 4 dest. 15, quest. 3, as 
 though he had taught that it is not lawful to put thieves to 
 death, nor any others than those expressed in the old law. 
 But Herinx, Henno, and other Scotists, endeavour to offer 
 an explanation for him, and reply to the passage quoted as 
 we reply to St. Thomas. 
 
 " Is it lawful, by public authority, to put to death an inno- 
 cent person ? 
 
 " Ans. In no case is it directly lawful to put to death an 
 innocent person, unless God has expressly commanded it. 
 Hence, on account of the expressed command of God alone 
 are the Israelites excused for killing all whom they found in 
 the city of Jericho, from the infant to the old man, Jos. vi. 
 21. Thus also David is excused when, 2 Kings xxi. 9, (2 
 Sam.,) he gave up the seven sons of Saul, that they might 
 be crucified by the Gibeonites for the sins of Saul when de- 
 ceased. A similar command also God gave to Saul with 
 respect to the Amalekites, 1 Kings xv. 3, (1 Sam.) 
 
 " Is it not certainly lawful for a state indirectly to put in- 
 nocent persons to death ? 
 
 " It is lawful for the state for a just cause to do or omit 
 any thing from which the death of an innocent person fol- 
 lows not intending it, which is as it were indirectly to put to 
 death. Thus, a commander justly besieging a city lawfully 
 
OF HOMICIDE. 273 
 
 explodes and overthrows a tower in which are innocent per- 
 sons, if otherwise he cannot storm the city : because that 
 general avails himself of his right ; and thus an effect can- 
 not be imputed to him which has followed beyond his inten- 
 tion. 
 
 " In the same way, if a king besieging a city threatens 
 totally to overthrow it, unless some innocent person be sent 
 to him, the authors commonly resolve that the state may 
 send the innocent man himself, and even deliver him to the 
 king, not with the intention that he may be killed by him, 
 but with the intention that the country may be freed. In this 
 way, St. Thomas excuses Simon, who sent the two sons 
 of Jonathan to Tripho, 1 Mach. ch. xiii. 
 
 " In this case, indeed, that innocent person seems obliged 
 to expose his own life for the common good ; and, according 
 to Daelman, he would become guilty of a grievous offence 
 against the state, if he should refuse to go to the king, and 
 as such he might be given up. 
 
 " The case would be different if that innocent person 
 were in no way a subject of that place : because a stranger 
 is not bound to undergo death for the sake of a foreign state ; 
 yet the state might compel such a stranger lurking within 
 her jurisdiction to depart with danger of death. 
 
 " ObJ. I. From this mission the death of an innocent 
 person follows, and the freedom of the state only from the 
 changed will of the king ; therefore, &c. 
 
 " I answer, that from this mission the death of an inno- 
 cent person does not follow immediately, but from the 
 depraved will of the king : but when a bad effect follows 
 only mediately, a good one should follow only mediately. 
 
 *' Obj. 11. It would not be lawful in any case to give up 
 an innocent person to wild beasts, nor the sacred books to be 
 profaned by a king ; therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : as to the first, there is this 
 difference : that wild beasts naturally are savage and devour ; 
 and thus they who cast a person to wild beasts, put him 
 directly to death ; but the king acts freely, and thus he him- 
 self, who does not send directly, puts to death. 
 
 " As for the second, there is this difference, that by the 
 profanation of the sacred books, an injury is done to God 
 h'mself, and to religion, which is much more serious than 
 23* 
 
274 OF HOMICIDE. 
 
 any injury inflicted on the commonwealth ; besides, the 
 sacred manuscripts are of a higher order, and are not or- 
 dained for the preservation of the state, but for the salvation 
 of souls ; but the members of a community are ordained for 
 the preservation of the community. 
 
 « Various examples of the Holy Martyrs add to the -con- 
 firmation of this opinion, who chose rather to die than give 
 up the sacred manuscripts into the hands of kings, as is to 
 be seen in the Roman martyrology, on the second day of 
 January, and on the eleventh of February. 
 
 " For the same reason it is thought that it is not lawful to 
 send a virgin to a king to be defiled : because the chastity 
 of a virgin is not so ordained for the preservation of the state 
 as the life of an innocent subject. Besides, in the case of a 
 virgin, there is the proximate danger lest she may consent to 
 his lust ; and such danger there is not in case of putting to 
 death an innocent person : so that, on this account, the state 
 might maintain itself permissively in the case of the innocent 
 person, rather than in the case of the virgin." 
 
 In the following sections, cases are proposed in which it 
 is asked whether homicide may be lawfully committed. By 
 private authority it is never lawful to put a man to death. 
 Banditti, who are outlawed, and may therefore be killed by 
 any one, are considered as being put to death by public 
 authority. A husband is not at liberty to put a wife to death, 
 when taken in the act of adultery. It is the more common 
 spinion of the doctors that it is lawful to take lives in self- 
 defence. The following proposition has been condemned by 
 Alexander VII. " It is lawful to kill a false accuser, false 
 witnesses, and even the judge by whom an unjust sentence 
 is certainly threatened, if the innocent person can in no 
 other way escape injury." But when the moderation of 
 a blameless defence is preserved, homicide is lawful. The 
 conditions are the following (No. 125). 
 
 " Firsts that the defence be not made in order to take 
 revenge, but in order to repel injury. Against this condition 
 he sins, who defends himself through anger, hatred, or re- 
 venge. 
 
 " Second : that the attacked person does not use greater de- 
 fensive force than may be necessary to avert the threatened 
 death ; hence, if the attacked person may escape by fleeing, 
 
OF HOMICIDE. 275 
 
 crying out, thrusting aside the weapons of the assailant, 
 wounding, &c., he defends himself unlawfully by the death 
 of the assailant. 
 
 " Third : that real violence is offered ; otherwise it would 
 not be defence but aggression; and that the defendant repels 
 the offered violence, by violence of a similar nature. 
 
 " Hence, you may not anticipate and kill him who threat- 
 ens you with death only by menaces ; nor a robber who 
 meets you, and attempts nothing against you by any action ; 
 nor even him who, by deceit, treachery, or calumny, endea- 
 vours to inflict death upon you, say a false accuser, a false 
 witness, &c. ; as is plain from the condemned proposition 
 above quoted. 
 
 " But do not understand these remarks, as if the assailed 
 person ought to wait until the assailant shall have given the 
 first stroke ; but it is sufficient that he does something, by 
 which ho may be morally regarded as attacking; for in- 
 stance, if he already draws a sword, &c. 
 
 " Fourth : that the good effect of the defence may exceed 
 or at least equal the bad effect : otherwise a just cause would 
 be wanting. See this at large in De Cocq and Daelman. 
 
 " Fifth : that a bad effect do not immediately and directly 
 ensue, and the good effect only mediately and indirectly : be- 
 cause this would be to do evil that good may result. Hence 
 it is not lawful to throw an infant into a well, that it may be 
 baptized. 
 
 " Sixth : that the death of the assailant be not intended, 
 neither as end, nor as means, nor as the effect of defence ; 
 because, as it is unlawful by private authority to kill a person, 
 it is also unlawful that an attacked person should intend to 
 kill the assailant. 
 
 " These conditions being supplied, it is no sin, not even 
 against charity, (as the common opinion teaches,) to defend 
 one's own life by killing an unjust assailant : unless the per- 
 son should perhaps be necessary, or very useful to the state, 
 or some other circumstance should be in the way, which 
 might dictate, that the life of the assailant should be preferred 
 to the life of the assailed." 
 
 After adducing as proofs, a sentence from Augustine and 
 the Roman Catechism, and Clement, the last authority quoted 
 is St. Thomas, as follows. 
 
276 OF HOMICIDE. 
 
 " It is proved 4th, from the reasons of St. Thomas, q. 64, 
 art. 7, of which the first is that according to justice it is law- 
 ful to repel force by force; second, because in itself con- 
 sidered, and other things being equal, a man is bound to pro- 
 vide more for his own life than for that of another : the third 
 and principal reason, is, that the killing of an assailant in 
 this case is not voluntary, because it is beyond intention ; for, 
 as from such a defence one's own preservation immediately 
 follows, as well as the death of the assailant, it is lawful 
 thus to defend one's self by intending a good effect, and by 
 permitting a bad effect. 
 
 " Here several justly remark, that these and similar things 
 ought not to be preached to the people, lest it should too much 
 extend the license ; these things are to be very rarely advised, 
 because it is seldom that another means of escape is wanting." 
 
 The 128th section discusses the question, whether it is 
 lawful, in defence of chastity, to kill the assailant ? 
 
 " The negative opinion, as it is in our day the more com- 
 mon, seems also more correct, and to be practically ob- 
 served." 
 
 "It is proved, 1. Because chastity is taken either for a 
 virtue of the mind ; and this cannot be taken from those who 
 withhold their consent : and hence Saint Lucia said to the 
 tyrant : ' If you command me to be violated against my will, 
 my chastity will be doubled to a crown ;' or it is taken for 
 the integrity of the body; and this is of inferior value to the 
 life of a man, and therefore cannot be preferred to the life of 
 an assailant : therefore, a person defending chastity thus un- 
 derstood, by killing the assailant, would not preserve the mo- 
 deration of blameless defence. 
 
 " It is proved 2, from St. Aug., Book I., concerning free 
 will, chap. 5, where he says : 'I do not indeed find fault with 
 the law, (it was the civil law, by which assailers of chastity 
 were slain with impunity,) which permits such persons to be 
 killed with impunity ; but on what condition I shall defend 
 those who kill, I cannot discover.' 
 
 " Add to this, that among the Saints, whom the church 
 worships, we read of none who made use of this defence, al- 
 though doubtless, sometimes opportunity would have been 
 afforded. Nor is this case also found excepted from the 
 general law, ' Thou shalt not Mil.'* 
 
OF HOMICIDE. 277 
 
 "In the loss of chastity, there is danger of consenting to 
 the lust of another, unless the assailant is slain ; therefore, he 
 
 is lawfully killed. 
 
 ****** 
 
 " Ans. Admitting also that the danger of consenting is 
 very probable, it would not therefore be lawful thus to defend 
 one's self: because it is not lawful to commit the certain sin 
 of killing a person, in order that an uncertain one may be 
 avoided. ' For who can be so foolish,' (says St. Augustine,) 
 * as to say. Let us sin now, lest perhaps, we may sin after- 
 wards : let us commit homicide now, lest perchance we may 
 
 afterwards fall into adultery.' 
 
 ****** 
 
 " Obj. IV. S. Aug., book against lying, says that it is less 
 wicked to lie in order to preserve chastity than to preserve 
 life ; but life may be defended by killing the assailant ; there- 
 fore chastity also. 
 
 ^^ Ans. The text of St. Aug., in which our opponents 
 wonderfully rejoice, treats evidently concerning chastity as it 
 is a virtue of the mind. 
 
 *' It is to be observed, that, although a person, whose chas- 
 tity is invaded, may not kill the assailant, yet she is bound in 
 every possible way to resist by fleeing, crying out, struggling 
 with hands and feet, &c., &;c. 
 
 f* Concerning kisses and immodest embraces, &c., it must 
 be said, that even afterwards, the person who has suffered 
 violence, may defend herself, for instance, by giving the fu- 
 gitive a box on the ear ; not indeed for revenge, but as an 
 evidence of indignation ; that thus for the future the immodest 
 aggressor may be deterred." (! !) 
 
 Concerning Duelling. (132.) 
 
 « What is a duel 1 
 
 " It is a contest between two or more by agreement, at an 
 appointed time and place without public authority, under- 
 taken with deliberate intention with the risk of killing. 
 
 " Hence, if two persons without any agreement, or with- 
 out a determination of time and place, flying into a passion 
 take up weapons and fight, it will not be properly called a 
 duel. 
 
 " It is considered a duel properly so called, if two persons 
 
278 OF HOMICIDE. 
 
 beginning to quarrel, v. g. in church, say mutually one to 
 another. This is not a fit place to settle our disputes : let us 
 go out of doors, or let us go into the next street ; and thus 
 begin a fight. Also, if they say. Let us fight with swords, 
 in the first place which shall occur for battle more conveni- 
 ent than this : because in these instances, place, time, &c., 
 are sufficiently determined. Collet adds that it is a duel, if 
 they resolve to fight with swords, whenever the one may 
 meet the other alone. 
 
 " It is not a duel, if the battle is commenced without dan- 
 ger of killing : yet a moral danger is sufficient : such as, if 
 the fight be commenced under this condition ; let us stand 
 until the first effiision of blood. 
 
 " The weapons, also, with which they fight, should in 
 these circumstances be morally deadly : such as a sword, 
 knife, stones, heavy clubs, &c. But if it be done with 
 hands only, it is not thought that such a danger is incurred. 
 
 ** How is duelling divided? 
 
 "Into simple, and ceremonial; also, into public, and 
 secret. 
 
 " A ceremonial one is that in which certain ceremonies 
 are used ; as the designation of weapons, election of seconds, 
 assumption of witnesses, &c. A simple one is that which 
 takes place without these ceremonies. 
 
 " By what law is duelling prohibited ? 
 
 " By the natural, positive divine, and human law, as well 
 civil as ecclesiastical. 
 
 " In what consists the wickedness of duelling ? 
 
 " In this, that each of the duellists throws himself into 
 the peril of eternal damnation, squanders his own life and 
 that of another, and attempts to kill by private authority : 
 the person challenging is besides guilty of gross scandal 
 against the person challenged, the seconds and witnesses. 
 
 " Is duelling always unlawful 1 
 
 " A duel commenced by private authority under any pre- 
 text whatever, or for the sake of displaying strength, or of 
 defending honour, or reputation, is always unlawful : the 
 reason is that for these causes, it is never lawful to kill. 
 But when undertaken in order to settle some obscure ques- 
 tion, or to ascertain justice, or truth ; it is, moreover, super- 
 stition, or tempting God. 
 
OF HOMICIDE. 279 
 
 '* Ohj. If a noble or military man does not accept a duel 
 he will be regarded as infamous ; therefore, &c. 
 
 " Be it so that he might be so considered, it would not 
 therefore be lawful to engage in a duel ; as according to 
 No. 129, it is unlawful to kill an unjust assailant of reputa- 
 tion, or honour : but how utterly false it is too, that any 
 thing truly disgraceful can be found in the refusal of a 
 duel : and hence our rulers resolved on the 27th of Feb. A. 
 D. 1610, to this effect, art. 4. ' Since most duels have their 
 origin in a wrong opinion, as if they were hindered by un- 
 manly fear, who do not avenge insults or revenge with their 
 own hand : the rulers declare that this opinion is false ; they 
 take under their protection the honour of those who have 
 suffered insults ; and they forbid any one to upbraid under 
 the arbitrary penalty of their indignation.' The same was 
 renewed in the year 1660, Aug. 19, art. 5. 
 
 " St. Lewis, Henry IV., and Lewis XIV., decreed as to 
 France, that they who fought in a duel should be regarded as 
 guilty of an offence against divine and human majesty, and 
 that their bodies should be cast to wild beasts. 
 
 " Hence, also, Alexander VII. justly condemned this pro- 
 position. 'A knight challenged to a duel may accept it, 
 lest he should incur the mark of infamy amongst others.' 
 
 " May a duel entered upon by public authority be law- 
 ful? 
 
 " Yes ; princes may certainly agree about a fixed time 
 and place, in order that one or more, chosen on both sides, 
 may fight in order to terminate a just war, the event of 
 which is uncertain, in order that thus a multitude may be 
 spared : nor is this properly called a duel, but a certain kind 
 of just war in behalf of the state. An example is afforded 
 in David meeting with Goliath. 
 
 " Is he who kills or mutilates another in a duel, obliged 
 to make restitution ? 
 
 " If the person killed or mutilated, has accepted the duel 
 freely, induced by no force, fraud, or treachery, and could 
 in a valid manner waive the right of restitution, the person 
 who has killed or mutilated him, does not appear to be 
 obliged to make restitution : because they are believed 
 mutually to remit restitution to one another ; it must be de- 
 
280 OF HOMICIDE. 
 
 termined otherwise, if he has been induced by force or fraud, 
 or has not been able to waive his right in a valid manner." 
 
 Concerning the punishments of Duellists. (133.) 
 
 " What are the punishments of duellists ? 
 
 " They are various, as well ecclesiastical as civil, and 
 those very severe. 
 
 "1, First: by virtue of Council of Trent, sess. 25. 
 concerning the Reformation, ch. 19., temporal lords are ex- 
 communicated, who grant room in their territories for a duel 
 between Christians. 
 
 " They, also, are excommunicated, who have fought the 
 battle, and their seconds : and these all incur the penalty of 
 perpetual infamy, and the confiscation of all their property. 
 
 " They also are excommunicated, who have given counsel 
 in the case of a duel as well in right as in fact ; also spectators, 
 viz., such as are present by appointment and intentionally, 
 &c. &c. 
 
 " The second penalty appointed by the Council of Trent 
 is, that if they die in the very act of conflict, they must for 
 ever be without ecclesiastical burial, even if (says the Mech- 
 lin Manual), before death, they have given signs of penitence ; 
 indeed, even if they have been sacramentally absolved by 
 the priest. 
 
 " Authors have commonly resolved, that he who, having 
 received a wound in the duel, does -not die immediately, 
 should not be deprived of ecclesiastical burial ; because such 
 a one cannot be said to have died in the very conflict ; but 
 Benedict, XIV., in his Bull, Detestabilem, of the year 
 1752, decreed, 1. that every one, whatsoever, dying from a 
 wound received in a duel, whether he died on the battle- 
 ground or elsewhere, is to be deprived of ecclesiastical 
 burial ; and he takes away from the Bishops the power of 
 dispensing upon this penalty. Yet if the duel is secret, they 
 should not be deprived of ecclesiastical burial : because secret 
 crimes ought not to be punished by a public penalty. In a 
 doubtful case, recourse must be had to the ordinary. 
 
 " The third penalty is that by which a person killing a 
 man in a duel, incurs an irregularity reserved to the Supreme 
 Pontiff: 
 
OF HOMICIDE. 281 
 
 " According to the edict of the Archduke Albert and Duchess 
 Isabella, of the year 1610, renewed Oct. 26, 1626, duellists 
 are punished with death, as well those who accept, as those 
 who give a challenge, also with the confiscation of their pro- 
 perty. 
 
 " Art. 2. Challengers are declared infamous, are deprived 
 of all rank, honour, and pension, and the half of their pro- 
 perty is forfeited. 
 
 " Finally, they who carry messages or letters containing 
 a challenge, or who have assisted duellists in any manner 
 whatsoever, or have accompanied them, are punished with 
 death and the confiscation of their property. 
 
 " In what way shall a common confessor treat a duellist, 
 who from a wound inflicted on him is in the article of death, 
 and begs to be absolved 1 
 
 " As regards reservation or excommunication, nothing 
 hinders from absolving him ; because, in the article of death, 
 there is no reservation ; but he is to be induced as effectually 
 as possible to lay aside all rancour of mind, and the spirit 
 of revenge; looking at the example of Christ: besides when 
 time permits the delay, it should be imposed on him that he 
 take care, or even an oath that if he recovers he will abide 
 by the commands of the church, and absolutely make 
 amends for all losses inflicted on the injured party, if he 
 owes any. 
 
 " But generally the confessor ought to inquire of the peni- 
 tent confessing a duel : 1st, whether he was the challenged 
 party or the challenger': 2d, what is the quality of each per- 
 son : 3d, whether he had cherished hatred, and for what 
 time : 4th, whether he has killed the other in the duel, &c. 
 
 " It i§ to be observed, that soldiers, noble officers, &c., 
 who in the preparation of mind are always ready to engage 
 in a duel, whenever it is offered them, can not be absolved ; 
 yet if they seem disposed, they are not to be interrogated in 
 particular, whether they might have done the same when an 
 occasion offered, but they are rather to be severely rebuked, 
 by placing before their eyes the enormity of the sin, and the 
 danger of ruining body and soul, to which they have exposed 
 themselves ; and they are to be strongly warned not to dare 
 attempt it in future." 
 24 
 
282 OF HOMICIDE. 
 
 The following sections are offered to the reader as a spe- 
 cimen of the puerile and filthy casuistry, which constitutes so 
 large a portion of the diviniti/, which Roman doctors teach, 
 and which Roman priests are taught. 
 
 Concerning Abortion. (134.) 
 
 *' That the foetus is alive long before birth is certain from 
 daily experience ; as many who have been cut out of the 
 womb of the mother have survived a long time : and hence, 
 Innocent XI. justly condemned this 35th proposition : < It 
 seems probable that every fostus, so long as it is in the 
 womb, is without a rational soul ; and that it then first begins 
 to have it, when it is born; and consequently it must be 
 said, that in no abortion is homicide committed.' 
 
 " As regards the incurring of punishments, in order that 
 some thing certain in practice may be afforded, authors com- 
 monly suppose that they are incurred by procuring abortion 
 after the fortieth day of the conception, if it is a male, and after 
 the eightieth day if it is a female ; and when it is doubtful 
 whether it is a male or female, it is presumed in the court of 
 conscience to be a male ; that this was the practice of the 
 Holy Penitentiary, Narsarrus attests, who had long and 
 much experience in it. (De Horn. leg. 5. cons. 46.) 
 
 " Is it sometimes lawful to procure abortion ? 
 
 " It is a most grievous sin, directly and intentionally to 
 procure abortion, whether the foetus is alive or not. 
 
 " Hence, Innocent XI. justly condemned this proposition, 
 (No. 34.) ' It is lawful to procure abortion before the 
 quickening of the foetus, lest a girl found pregnant may be 
 put to death, or rendered infamous.' 
 
 " Is the procuring of abortion properly called homicide ? 
 
 " Ans. If the foetus is alive, it is undoubtedly homicide, 
 properly so called, and indeed so much the more severe, be- 
 cause it is destined in addition eternally to destroy the soul 
 of the infant. Therefore, the person procuring such an 
 abortion becomes obnoxious to irregularity, and the other 
 penalties of homicide." 
 
OF HOMICIDE. 283 
 
 " If the fcEtus is not alive, (which is always uncertain,) it 
 is not. homicide, properly so called, but only by way of in- 
 ference, in so far as Tertullian says in apolog. ch. 3, * to 
 hinder from being born, is an anticipation of homicide.' 
 Hence, the person procuring such an abortion, would indeed 
 commit a sin similar in wickedness to homicide, yet he would 
 not incur the penalties of homicide. 
 
 " Is it not lawful to cause abortion, at least indirectly ? 
 
 " Ordinarily, he sins grievously, who does that from which 
 he may and ought foresee that abortion will follow, although 
 he may not formally intend it,"&c. A mother is not at 
 liberty to take medicine to procure abortion, even if the death 
 of the child as well as of herself appears certain unless the 
 remedy is applied. 
 
 *' But what if, unless a medicine be taken, the mother will 
 certainly die, together with the foetus, and without baptism ? 
 
 " In this speculative case, Steyaert thinks that it is not un- 
 just, if she be saved who can be, and he be left to perish, 
 who would have perished at all events. 
 
 " But practically, it must be said with Daelman, that this 
 supposition can scarcely ever be true : for it will not be clear, 
 whether even if the mother were dead, the foetus could not 
 be cut out alive : nor can it certainly be known, whether the 
 mother might not have survived without such a remedy, as 
 in similar cases the most expert physicians may often be de- 
 ceived. Besides, if this supposition were once practically 
 admitted, a risk and a certainty would be supposed, which do 
 not in reality exist, and thus frequently a pretext might be 
 given for expelling the foetus. 
 
 " Authors agree, however, that if the danger to the foetus 
 is equal, whether the remedy be taken or not, then it is pro- 
 per for the mother to take it : because, from this, greater 
 danger is not brought upon the foetus, and care is taken for 
 the life of the mother. 
 
 " If it can be ascertained that the foetus is not alive, and 
 the mother will die unless she take the remedy, then it is ad- 
 mitted that the mother may use a medicine which is directly 
 curative of the mother, and in itself does not tend to abortion, 
 although there may be danger that abortion may follow from 
 A, provided that the mother cannot be saved by another re- 
 medy : because then abortion would be only permitted, not 
 
284 OF HOMICIDE. 
 
 procured. Yet if danger of death does not threaten the mo- 
 ther from the natural disease, but -from another source, as 
 for instance, because it is foreseen that she must be killed, or 
 that she will die in labour, then she may not by any means 
 use such a remedy. 
 
 " More about abortions, and the mode of preventing, espe- 
 cially voluntary ones, may be seen in the celebrated Cangi- 
 amila, in his Sacred Embryology." (! !) 
 
 Concerning the punishments of those who procure abortion. 
 (135.) 
 " It is to be premised, that to procure abortion, is, by de- 
 sign and intention, to effect by one's self, or by another, that 
 the foetus be prematurely expelleS from the womb : and hence 
 it is not called simply a procuring of abortion, if it is casual 
 or only indirectly voluntary in the remote cause, to which 
 the effect is joined by accident ; but it is requisite that abor- 
 tion be intended, either as the means, or as the end, at least 
 as much as it is from the nature of the action. 
 
 * * ' * * * * 
 
 " What punishments do they incur, who procure abortion? 
 
 " Those who cause abortion only indirectly, by not for 
 mally intending it, do not seem to incur the penalties ap 
 pointed for those who procure abortion, because to procure 
 as was said above, means studiously and intentionally to ef- 
 fect that the fcetus be prematurely expelled. 
 
 "SixtusV., in the Bull Effrenatam, Oct. 29, 1588, 
 decrees that all who procure the abortion of a foetus, whether 
 living or dead, this effect having followed, also those who 
 drink potions to produce sterility, or who have afforded any 
 hindrance to the conception of the foetus, or in any way have 
 given advice or aid to them, incur all the penalties, provided 
 in every law against voluntary homicides ; and besides, sub- 
 jects the same, from the very fact, to irregularity and excom- 
 munication, reserved to the Supreme Pontiff, excepting the 
 article of death : he also deprives them of offices and bene- 
 fices, and disqualifies them from holding them ever after- 
 wards. 
 
 "This Bull of SixtusV., Gregory XIV. modified, in the 
 Bull, Sedes Apostolica, given May 31, 1591, and re- 
 stricted the said penalties of irregularity, excommunication, 
 
OF HOMICIDE. 285 
 
 and the others passed by Sixtus, to those only, who procure 
 the abortion of a living foetus, or in any way whatever have 
 given assistance or advice to them : besides, he declares that 
 the bishop, and any confessor whatsoever, deputed by the 
 bishop for this special case, may absolve from this case and 
 the annexed censure, &c. 
 
 " Authors remark, that as in the Bull of Sixtus V., it is 
 said, the effect having followed, he does not incur said penal- 
 ties, who has endeavoured to procure abortion, or to induce 
 to abortion, if that effect has not followed. 
 
 " The civil laws appoint for abortion before the quickening 
 of the foetus, the punishment of exile for the woman, after 
 quickening, the punishment of death, &c. 
 
 " What things are to be observed relative to the confession 
 and absolution of one who has procured abortion? 
 
 " Ans. 1st. The quality of the person is to be asked, who 
 has procured abortion in herself or in another. 
 
 " 2. The quality and number of the persons by whom the 
 abortion has been procured : because perhaps they are im- 
 plicated in the nefarious scandal. 
 
 " 3. For how long a time they have intended the abortion, 
 because such crimes are not usually committed, except through 
 a long course of time, during which very many crimes are 
 performed, on account of different and intervening intentions 
 of the same crime, on account of repeated attempts, &c. 
 
 " Concerning absolution, it must be ascertained, 1st. Whe- 
 ther excommunication has been incurred. 
 
 " 2. Whether proximate occasions of sins, which are al- 
 most connected with this sin, have been afforded, as incest, 
 sacrilege, concubinage, &c. ; for those who procure abortion 
 are generally obnoxious to these crimes. 
 
 " 3. Whether he has made satisfaction, or is at least pre- 
 pared to make satisfaction for the losses which have followed 
 by reason of the abortion : for instance, that an inheritance 
 must on this account pass over to another family. 
 
 " Akin to abortion is the overlaying of children, (a re- 
 served case in various dioceses,) which is a species of homi- 
 cide or parricide by which some one suffocates children, or 
 in any way kills them, either altogether voluntarily and di- 
 rectly, or casually and in consequence of smothering, as is 
 usually done, v. g., when they place infants of a very ten- 
 21^ 
 
286 OF HOMICIDE. 
 
 der age with them in the same bed ; such persons cannot 
 regularly be excused from mortal sin on account of the dan- 
 ger of smothering, &c. &c. 
 
 " Is it lawful to cut open a living mother, in order that off- 
 spring may be baptized, which would otherwise die without 
 baptism ? 
 
 " If this operation cannot be done with a well-founded 
 hope of preserving the mother aUve, (which hope is some- 
 times believed to exist, as may be seen in Cangiamila above 
 cited,) it is unlawful, whatever might be hoped concerning 
 the preservation of the offspring ; for although the mother 
 ought to expose her own life for the preservation of her child, 
 her life may not for this reason be taken from her, nor should 
 she therefore herself consent that it should be taken away. 
 
 " But if a pregnant mother dies, this operation 
 not only may, but ought to be performed, and in- 
 deed by the priest, in the absence of a surgeon and 
 other skilful persons, in order that the child may 
 be baptized. 
 
 " Is it lawful to throw a boy into the river that he may be 
 baptized, if he cannot otherwise be baptized ? 
 
 " No : because this throwing, as is supposed, is in itself 
 destructive of the child, and the good effect, namely, the 
 baptism of the child, follows only mediately from it, if the 
 forni and intention of baptism are doubtless present, where- 
 as the bad effect, namely, the killing, follows immediately. 
 
 " Besides, it is disputed whether such baptism is valid ; 
 which question, see No. 8, concerning the Sacrament of Bap- 
 tism." 
 
 Concerning Whipping and Imprisonment, (137.) 
 
 " Is it lawful to whip any one? 
 
 " Ans. St. Thomas, art. 2. in corp., replies, ' It is not 
 lawful, except by way of punishment, on account of justice; 
 but no one justly punishes another, unless he is subject to 
 his jurisdiction ; and therefore it is not lawful to whip any 
 one, except for him who has some authority over him whom 
 he whips.' 
 
 " Thus, for the sake of reproof and discipline, a father 
 can lawfully whip a child ; the same is the case with a mas- 
 
OF HOMICIDE. 287 
 
 ter and a tutor, and with others who sustain the place of a 
 father, or any one else having similar authority. 
 
 " Is it lawful for a husband to whip his wife? 
 
 " The Germans and the rougher sort of our own country 
 gladly embrace and practise the affirmative. As for mode- 
 rate WHIPPING IT MAY BE PERMITTED, IP THE WIFE IS 
 MUCH IN FAULT, AND THERE IS NO HOPE THAT SHE MAY 
 
 BE CORRECTED IN ANY OTHER WAY : but this case is vopy 
 rare ; and hence the French and the more polished of our 
 own country regard it as barbarous to whip a wife ; but the 
 remark of a letter among the works of St. Bernard pleases 
 them better ; * You will chastise a bad wife with ridicule more 
 effectually than with a stick ;' the reason is, because the wife 
 is not the slave of the man, but his companion, and one 
 flesh with him. 
 
 " Is it lawful to imprison any one ? 
 
 "St. Thomas, art. 3. in corp., replies: 'To imprison, or 
 in any way whatever detain any one is unlawful, unless it 
 be done according to the order of justice, or as a punishment^ 
 or as a caution for avoiding some harm.' 
 
 "Although parents may not justly imprison children, they 
 may yet, for a time, shut them up at home, for the sake of 
 discipline," &c. 
 
 Concerning the Confessor of a Homicide. (141.) 
 
 "How must the confessor treat a" homicide in the tribunal 
 of penance 1 
 
 ^^ Ans. 1. Let him ask him, for what cause or end the 
 homicide has been committed ; whether on account of the 
 just defence of life, by preserving the moderation of blame- 
 less defence, or by not preserving it, &c. 
 
 " 2. Whether he killed the person from sudden passion, 
 or from inveterate hatred, at the same time questioning about 
 the time during which this hatred has lasted, how often it has 
 been renewed, &c. 
 
 " 3. Whether no blasphemies, reproaches, or curses have 
 preceded ; also, whether he has perpetrated cruelty or pollu- 
 tion on the body of the slain person. 
 
 " 4. Whether it was directly voluntary ; in which event 
 it is at the same time a reserved case. 
 
288 OF SEDUCTION. 
 
 " 5. What means he employed, whether he has killed by- 
 treachery and stratagem, by a quick or slow poison ; which 
 chiefly takes place with female homicides : whether he has 
 employed associates ; for he has besides committed just so 
 many sins of scandal as he has employed associates. 
 
 " 6. The quality of the person slain is to be asked : v. g. 
 if he is a near relation, allied by the same blood, it is parri- 
 cide ; if a clergyman, it is sacrilege ; and it has the annexed 
 greater excommunication reserved to the Supreme Pontiff. 
 
 " Finally, let the confessor inquire the injuries caused, 
 &c., that he may enjoin due restitution. 
 
 " These things having been duly examined, let the con- 
 fessor of the homicide set before him the grievousness of his 
 crime: also, the penalties, both civil and ecclesiastical, to 
 which he has made himself obnoxious, and induce him to 
 conceive contrition worthy of such a crime, and having im- 
 posed a salutary penance (especially one, which may last 
 
 long, &C.) HE MAY ABSOLVE HIM WHEN RIGHTLY DISPOSED, 
 
 if he has authority to absolve from this crime^^^ &c. 
 
 The sections from 142-150, treat of seduction, fornica- 
 tion, and adultery, and the restitution which is due in the 
 different aspects which such cases may present. I must be 
 excused from translating them all in detail. The following 
 are a k\v of the principles, which are inculcated. 
 
 Concerning restitution for seduction, if the virgin has 
 freely consented. (143.) 
 
 " If the virgin and her parents freely give their consent, 
 &c., the seducer is under no obligation to make restitution 
 to them : because, on the supposition even that they cannot 
 waive their right, they can certainly waive their right to 
 restitution ; and this they are regarded as yielding by afford- 
 ing their consent. 
 
 " If the virgin consents, but the parents are unwilling, or 
 ignorant; then if the intercourse remains secret, the seducer 
 is again under no obligation to make restitution. 
 
 " If it becomes known to the parents only, he is bound to 
 make satisfaction for the sorrow he has unjustly occasioned 
 them by asking pardon, by the exhibition of respect, 
 &c. 
 
OF SEDUCTION. 289 
 
 " But if it is widely divulged, he is besides obliged to bear 
 and put a stop to the infamy in the best way he can. 
 
 "Observe, parents are to be regarded as unwilling, not 
 only when they positively resist, but also when they are 
 ignorant of the fact, unless, indeed, they knowingly neglect 
 the proximate danger of the seduction being effected ; for 
 instance, when they permit their daughter to engage in 
 familiar conversation with an immodest young man. 
 
 " In case that the parents do not consent, is the seducer 
 bound to an increase of the dowry, which the parents are 
 now obliged to make greater, in order that their daughter 
 may contract a suitable marriage? 
 
 " Authors are divided : those who maintain the affirma- 
 tive, say that, not only has the daughter a right to contract 
 a suitable marriage, but the parents also : those who main- 
 tain the negative, say that parents have no such right, ex- 
 cept dependently upon the right and will of the daughter, 
 who, if she chooses, may, without injury to her parents, 
 remain unmarried, or unite herself with one, who is her 
 inferior in rank. 
 
 " Practically on account of the probability of both opin- 
 ions, the seducer appears obliged to some augmentation of 
 the dowry,, according to the arbitration of a prudent man ; 
 especially if he is rich, and she is poorer ; and this certainly 
 by the law of charity, if the seduced, on account of the loss 
 of her virginity, and the want of dowry, is in danger of 
 prostituting herself: for as the seducer is also to blame, he 
 is bound to guard against these evils : and this confessors 
 should observe, as Wiggers admonishes ; otherwise sedu- 
 cers may not readily be absolved, say De Cocq and Braun- 
 man." 
 
 What restitution is he obliged to make, who has seduced 
 by force or fra udl (144.) 
 
 " He is bound to repair all losses and evils that have fol- 
 lowed ; as he is the true and unjust cause of them all. 
 
 " He is under obligation to repair the personal injury, &c. 
 if the virgin requires it, &c. 
 
 " 3. He is obliged to make . honorary satisfaction, both to 
 the parents and the virgin, by asking pardon, &c. 
 
290 OF SEDUCTION. 
 
 ^' 4. If the injuries cannot be repaired except by marry- 
 ing the seduced, the corrupter is bound to marry her even 
 before the sentence of the judge: but if she refuses mar- 
 riage, the seducer is under obligation to compensate all 
 injuries in so far as it can be done. 
 
 " 5. If the seduced marries another, who treats her badly, 
 dismisses her, &c., on account of her lost virginity, the 
 seducer is again bound to compensate those losses and evils 
 according to the judgment of a prudent man. 
 
 " Precisely, the same things are to be said of him, who, 
 indeed, does not seduce a virgin, but has done such things 
 from which she is believed to be seduced ; even if the girl 
 was not a virgin, but was only considered such before," 
 &c., &c. 
 
 If the seduction has been effected through a real promise 
 of marriage, or through feigned marriage, he is obliged 
 promptly to fulfil his engagement, and is forbidden to enter 
 any religious order, which would require celibacy, unless 
 the injured party is willing. 
 
 The case is different, 1. If the seduced commits sin against 
 chastity with another. 2. If she has pretended to be a vir- 
 gin, or noble, &c. 3. If the promise of marriage was made 
 in such a way that she might know it was only feigned ; for 
 instance, from threats, exaggerations, inconstancy, ambiguity 
 of language, or great disparity of- rank: because in such 
 circumstances, the girl is regarded not as being deceived, 
 but as having deceived herself. 4. If the girl will not marry 
 him, or her parents are unwilling to give her up to the 
 seducer. 5. If greater evils may prudently be apprehended 
 from the marriage, as serious quarrels between families, dis- 
 inheritings, grievous scandal, &c. 6. If a hindrance from 
 which no dispensation can be obtained supervenes ; as, if the 
 seducer has contracted with another, has solemnly made 
 profession, &c. The seducer is bound to remove every im- 
 pediment which is morally removable. In all these cases, 
 the seducer is not only obliged to marry the girl, but in the 
 first three, he is ordinarily not obliged to repair the injury 
 done to her, " nor as it seems in the fourth," &c. 
 
OF SEDUCTION. 291 
 
 Concerning the Confessor of a Seducer or Fornicator, 
 (No. 147.) 
 
 The confessor is directed to inquire, after hearing of the 
 illicit intercourse : 
 
 " 1. Whether offspring has followed or will follow ; if it 
 be said that it neither has followed nor will follow, then let 
 it be prudently and circumspectly asked, whence he knows 
 it; in order that if perchance abortion has been procured, 
 the penitent may tell it ; and if it has not been procured, that 
 he may not learn to do it. 
 
 " But if it be ascertained that offspring has followed or 
 will follow ; let the penitent be instructed concerning the ob- 
 ligation of maintaining it when it has followed ; but concern- 
 ing that which is likely to follow, he must be prudently and 
 strongly admonished, to take care that no injury may hap- 
 pen to the foetus, but that it may be brought safe to light, and 
 that provision may be seasonably made for its baptism. He 
 is also to be admonished that the child, when born, be not 
 exposed or otherwise neglected ; also that it be legitimated, 
 if it can be done, and greater evils are not in the way. 
 
 " 2. Let the confessor inquire whether he has induced the 
 woman by force, or fraud, or importunities equivalent to 
 force ; whether under promise of marriage : let him also 
 show the obligations with regard to the seduced, as it has 
 been explained in preceding numbers. 
 
 " Let the confessor also reflect that it often happens that 
 ofTspring does not ensue, because conception is hindered by 
 the sin of Onan, &c. 
 
 " Concerning dissolute young men, it is also to be consid- 
 ered whether they do not belong to those abandoned charac- 
 ters, who, when they have secretly seduced a girl, openly 
 boast of the fact among their associates, and thus deprive 
 the deceived of all honour and reputation by their nefarious 
 detraction. 
 
 " Likewise concerning immodest women, it should be ob- 
 served that they sometimes abuse young men of a tender 
 age, and often ignorant, for purposes of lust, by force, de- 
 ceit, or fraud ; and these, without doubt, are guilty of seduc- 
 tion, the most grievous scandal, &c. 
 
292 VIRTUE OF RELIGION. 
 
 " 3. Generally, in all sins of licentiousness, the circum- 
 stances are to be asked both of the person confessing, and 
 of the person with whom, or about whom the sin has been 
 committed ; whether she is single, married, bound by a vow, 
 a relative, &c. 
 
 " 4. As for external sins of licentiousness between two 
 persons, the confessor ought to ask, whether those persons 
 live together in the same house: because when once the 
 sense of shame is taken away, such dwelling together is 
 most dangerous ; and therefore, ordinarily, they should, with- 
 out dissimulation, be separated. Farther, it should then be 
 asked, how long they have thus lived together, what sacra- 
 ments they have frequented, &c. ; as is taught more at large 
 in the Treatise concerning Penance." 
 
 The chapters which treat of the injury and restitution due 
 in case of adultery, and the manner of making such restitu- 
 tion, I decline translating. 
 
 The Treatise concerning Contracts, which constitutes the 
 remainder of the 3d volume, contains nothing of special in- 
 terest to the general reader. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 
 Vol. IV. commences with a Treatise on the Virtue of Re- 
 ligion. 
 
 " Religion is defined as a virtue exhibiting the worship 
 due to God, as the fast principle of all things. It is also 
 rightly defined by others, a virtue inclining the will to 
 pay the worship of latria due to God. Religion is a super- 
 natural virtue connected with charity," &c. 
 
 At the close of No. 3. the following question, is asked. 
 
 " How can all the worship of religion be said to be due 
 to God, when there are works of supererogation, by which 
 God is worshipped ; suppose the vow of chastity ? 
 
 " I answer with Wiggers, that all our works are rightly 
 
OF PRAYER.^ 293 
 
 said to be due to God ; because we are in every way the ser- 
 vants of God ; yet as God does not exact all these works, 
 as to the exercise of the act, as though due by a special pre- 
 cept, in this sense, some are called works of supererogation ; 
 for there are no works of pure liberality in man with respect 
 to God. Besides, this worship is said to be due to God, be- 
 cause it is due, or can be paid to no other." 
 
 No. 12 treats of the necessity of prayer to salvation. 
 
 No. 13. Of the 'precept of prayer. 
 
 " Is there a command to pray ? 
 
 " St. Thomas teaches the affirmative answer, q. 83. art. 
 2., &c., saying, — ' To ask (or pray) falls under a precept 
 of religion, which precept is plainly enjoined,' John xvi. 24, 
 where it is said, Ask and ye shall receive. The catechism 
 of the Council of Trent teaches the same. But this precept 
 is divine and natural. 
 
 " When is the precept of praying obligatory 1 
 
 " Ans. Wiggers, Sylvius, Layman, and other scholastics 
 enumerate many occasions in which the precept of prayer 
 is obligatory, either in itself or by some circumstance ac- 
 cording to the ordinary laws of God ; namely, 
 
 "1. About the beginning of the use of reason.- Thus 
 Wiggers, Boudart, &c., teach. 
 
 " 2. In danger of death. Sylv., Boud., Laym., Bee. 
 
 " 3. In grievous temptation. Wigg., Boud., Van Roy. 
 
 " 4. When it is necessary to begin some arduous work. 
 Sylv, 
 
 " 5. When the sinner is obliged to prepare himself for a 
 state of grace ; or when some sacrament is to be received or 
 administered. Wigg. 
 
 '* 6. In any necessity of the church, state, or community. 
 Wigg., Laym. 
 
 " 7. Also in our own necessity or danger, or in that of 
 our neighbour, especially in spiritual, according to the rule 
 by which charity obliges ; when, indeed, prayer will appear 
 to be a very convenient means of obviating the necessity. 
 Less., Laym., and St. Thorn., &c. 
 
 " 8. That the precept of prayer is obligatory on festival 
 days, St. Thomas indicates in the passage already cited, say- 
 ing : * The appointed time of prayer seems determined by 
 the church for all people ; as by the statute of the canons 
 25 
 
294 ^OF PRAYER. 
 
 they are obliged on festival days to be present in the divine 
 services, especially in the sacrifice of the mass, that they 
 may conform their intention to the ministers praying for the 
 people. 
 
 " It ought to be observed that not every defect of prayer 
 induces mortal sin, &c." 
 
 From No. 16 to No. 24, the Lord's prayer is explained 
 and discussed. 
 
 No. 25. Concerning the angelic salutation. 
 
 "Hail Mary, full of grace, &c. 
 
 ** The pious devotion of the faithful from the most ancient 
 custom of the church in its infancy, observes, that after the 
 Lord's prayer, the angelic salutation be recited, that through 
 the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, we may obtain 
 what we ask from God : for she, next to Christ, is our hope. 
 
 " The angelic salutation consists of three parts : the first 
 part contains the salutation of the archangel Gabriel ; the se- 
 cond, the words of St. Elizabeth to Mary, spoken by the in- 
 spiration of the Holy Spirit ; the third part contains the 
 prayer of the church, invoking the patronage of the Virgin 
 Mother of God : but this part is believed to have been added 
 in the 5th cent., against the heresy of Nestorius, who denied 
 that Mary was to be called Deipara, or the Mother of God. 
 
 " Marchantius, in the Hortus Pastorum, book 2, de Spe., 
 Tract. 4, furnishes a more ample explanation of the angelic 
 salutation, for the use of preachers." 
 
 No. 26. Concerning the Rosary. 
 
 " From the Lord's prayer and the angelic salutation, is 
 framed the celebrated form of prayer, approved by the church, 
 which is called the Rosary, containing fifteen decades of an- 
 gelic salutations, fifteen Lord's prayers intervening, in which 
 are called to mind the principal mysteries of the life, death, 
 and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 " In this Rosary, the fifteen mysteries are disposed in this 
 order : that first, the five joyful mysteries may be remem- 
 bered, viz: 1. The annunciation of the Blessed Vir. Mary; 
 2, the visitation; 3, the nativity of Christ; 4, Jesus pre- 
 
OF PRAYER. 295 
 
 sented in the temple at the feast of the purification of the B. 
 M. v., (i. e., the Blessed Virgin Mary,) ; 5, Jesus found in 
 the temple. 
 
 " Five dolorous mysteries follow ; 1. The sorrow of Christ 
 in the garden; 2, his scourging; 3, his crowning with 
 thorns ; 4, the bearing of the cross ; 5, the crucifixion. 
 
 " Five glorious mysteries are added : 1. The resurrection 
 of the Lord ; 2, his ascension ; 3, the advent of the Holy 
 Spirit ; 4, the assumption of B. M. V. ; 5, the coronation 
 of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in heaven. 
 
 " It is proper, in catechisms and sermons, to teach tlie 
 faithful these mysteries of the Rosary, because they contain 
 an idea of the life of Christ. 
 
 " The practice of reciting the Rosary, is that the person 
 praying in the recitation of each decade represents to him- 
 self one of these mysteries, and bows his head at the names 
 of Mary and Jesus, and salutes the same as though repre- 
 sented and formerly constituted in such mystery." 
 
 No. 27. Concerning Litanies. 
 
 " St. Gregory encouraged the use of the litanies of all 
 saints: which form of praying had been practised in the 
 church long before him, &c. 
 
 " The litanies of the B. M. V. of Loretto, were approved 
 in subsequent periods, by the custom of the church, and the 
 authority of the Popes, in which the B. Virgin Mary is called 
 by various peculiar and metaphorical names, in order that 
 prayer to her at any time may be protracted without weari- 
 ness. 
 
 "Observe, that these two litanies alone have been ap- 
 proved by the church as public prayers : and hence these 
 two only may be publicly sung in the divine service, accord- 
 ing to the decree of Clement VIII., and the declaration of the 
 S. Congreg. Rit. in Alexand., May 15, 1608. 
 
 " Yet in this general prohibition, the litanies approved by 
 the Apostolic See do not seem to be included, such as it is 
 commonly affirmed the litanies of the holy name of Jesus 
 are, from the circumstance that Sixtus V. Const. Reddituri 
 has conceded 300 days of indulgence to those who recite 
 them, as Luc. Ferrarj* remarks after others in, &c., &c. 
 
296 
 
 OF PRAYER. 
 
 " It would appear that litanies, which are everywhere 
 found in prayer-books, approved by the censor, may be re- 
 cited by private persons."* 
 
 * The following is the litany of the Blessed Virgin, as furnished on 
 p. 128 of the Catholic Companion, published with the approbation of 
 the Right Rev. Dr. Kenrick. 
 
 THE LITANY OP THE BLESSED VIRGIN. 
 ANTHEM. 
 
 We fly to thy patronage, O holy mother of God ! despise not our 
 petitions in our necessities, but deliver us from all dangers, O ever 
 glorious and blessed Virgin I 
 'Lord have mercy on us, 
 Christ have mercy on us. 
 Lord have mercy on us, 
 Christ hear us, 
 Christ graciously hear us, 
 God the Father of Heaven, have mercy on us, 
 God the Son, Redeemer of the world, have mercy on us, 
 God the Holy Ghost, have mercy on us. 
 Holy Trinity, one God, have mercy on us. 
 
 Holy Mary, 
 
 Holy Mother of God, 
 
 Holy Virgin of Virgins, 
 
 Mother of Christ, 
 
 Mother of divine grace. 
 
 Mother most pure. 
 
 Mother most chaste, 
 
 Mother undefiled, 
 
 Mother unviolated, 
 
 Mother most amiable. 
 
 Mother most admirable. 
 
 Mother of our Creator, 
 
 Mother of our Redeemer, 
 
 Virgin most prudent, 
 
 Virgin most venerable. 
 
 Virgin most renowned. 
 
 Virgin most powerful. 
 
 Virgin most merciful. 
 
 Virgin most faithful, 
 
 Mirror of justice. 
 
 Seat of wisdom. 
 
 Cause of our joy, 
 
 Spiritual vessel. 
 
 Vessel of honour. 
 
 Vessel of singular devotion, 
 
 Mystical rose, ^ 
 
 Tower of David, 
 
OF PRAYER. 
 
 297 
 
 No. 28. Concerning canonical hours, 
 
 " What are canonical hours ? 
 
 *' Ans. They are vocal prayers, ordained and prescribed 
 by the church, to be spoken or sung daily, at certain hours. 
 
 " They are called prayers, in a wide sense, because the 
 greater part consists of prayers : they are called hours, be- 
 cause they are to be recited at certain hours of the day : also, 
 canonical, because most have been prescribed by canons : 
 they are called also, divine or ecclesiastical service, because 
 they have been instituted for the worship of God, and are 
 performed in the name of the church. 
 
 " This service is composed of psalms, lessons, hymns, &;c., 
 in pleasant variety ; all which are ordained for the worship 
 of God ; thus, therefore, the recitation of the hours is an act 
 of the virtue of religion; but it contains various acts of re- 
 ligion, prayers, the praises of God, returning of thanks, &c., 
 as also various acts of other virtues, faith, hope, charity, obe- 
 dience, penitence, dulia, (i. e., worship of saints, &c.), &c. 
 
 " How many canonical hours are there ? 
 
 " Seven are commonly enumerated, conformably to that 
 saying of David, Ps. 118, 164. 'Seven times a day, I have 
 given praise to thee ;' the names of which are derived from 
 the hours in which they are usually recited, namely, the 
 matin with praises, first, third, sixth, ninth, vespers and the 
 
 25* 
 
 Tower of ivory, 
 
 House of gold, 
 
 Ark of the covenant, 
 
 Gate of heaven, 
 
 Morning star, 
 
 Health of the weak, 
 
 Refuge of sinners, 
 
 Comforter of the afflicted, 
 
 Help of Christians, 
 
 Queen of Angels, 
 
 Queen of Patriarchs, 
 
 Queen of Prophets, 
 
 Queen of Apostles, 
 
 Queen of Martyrs, 
 
 Queen of Confessors, 
 
 Queen of Virgins, 
 
 Queen of All Saints, &c., &c. , 
 
 
998' * OF PRAYER. 
 
 completorium. But they are adapted to the mysteries of the 
 passion of Christ, according to these verses : 
 
 Matutina ligat Christum, qui crimina solvit : 
 
 Prima replet sputis, causam dat Tertia mortis ; 
 
 Sexta cruci nectit ; latus egus nona bipertit ; 
 
 Vespera deponit ; tumulo Completa reponit. 
 
 The matin binds Christ, who absolves from sins. 
 
 The first covers him with spittle ; the third gives the cause of his 
 death. 
 
 The sixth binds him to the cross ; the ninth pierces his side. 
 
 The vesper takes him down ; the completa lays him in the tomb. 
 " That certain hours of prayers were observed from the 
 time of the Apostles, the Sacred Writings show, Acts iii. 1. 
 * Now Peter and John went up to the temple, at the ninth 
 hour of prayer ;' and x. 9. ' And on the next day Peter 
 went up to the higher parts of the house to pray about the 
 sixth hour.' " 
 
 From the 29th No. we learn that they who are initiated 
 in Sacred Orders are obliged to recite the Canonical hours. 
 
 " The Clergy of the first Tonsure, or of the lower orders 
 are in our day not under obligation : but whoever contends 
 with Huygens that they were formerly bound by this obliga- 
 tion, ought certainly to admit that it has ceased through con- 
 trary custom, so that they are not even obliged to recite the 
 office of the B. M. V. nor the penitential psalms, if we re- 
 gard positive, ecclesiastical law." 
 
 Concerning the obligation of Religious orders to observe 
 the Canonical hours. (30.) 
 
 " The Religious of both sexes, who have by profession 
 attached themselves to the choir are obliged to observe the 
 Canonical hours, so that if they have been absent from the 
 choir, they are bound to recite them privately. This obliga- 
 tion is founded more upon the generally received custom of 
 the church than on the decrees of Canons. Neither the 
 Novitii, nor the Conversi, nor Brethren, as they are called, 
 are under this obligation ; nor the Religious of the Society 
 of Jesus (Jesuits), nor the Hospitalarii, nor the Militares, &c. 
 because they have never by profession attached themselves 
 to a choir. 
 
CANONICAL HOURS. 299 
 
 The obligation whenever incurred " begins from the time 
 of making the profession, or joining the order, so that if any- 
 one should be ordained or make profession about noon, he is 
 obliged after assuming the order, or publishing his profes- 
 sion, to begin on that day, from the ninth of the hours, or 
 at least from the vespers ; because that is the ordinary time 
 of reciting the aforesaid hours : he is not obliged to read the 
 matin, which is accustomed to be recited early ; because the 
 obligation which now begins is not retrospective to past 
 time. 
 
 " What if some one, who has been ordained, or has pro- 
 fessed about noon, had already before recited the ninth and 
 vespers ? 
 
 " He seems bound to repeat those hours ; because he has 
 not satisfied the precept ; as he has not recited in the name 
 of the church, inasmuch as he was not as yet assumed or 
 deputed by the church," &c. 
 
 Those who hold a benefice sufiicient for the decent sup- 
 port of a clergyman of common condition are obliged daily 
 to recite the Canonical hours. (No. 31.) 
 
 If the benefice is unproductive, they are bound to recite 
 them sometimes, but not daily. (No. 32.) 
 
 "But it is to be observed that the preceding conclusions 
 are to be understood concerning a benefice, which constant- 
 ly, and in itself produces no fruit at all, or but little : for he 
 who has a benefice in itself productive, although he may for 
 some years lose the returns through the devastation of wars, 
 or of the seasons, or on account of particular statutes, by 
 which he is compelled to fast for one or two years, as is 
 said, he is not freed for that time from the recitation of the 
 Canonical hours ; because this benefice is in itself produc- 
 tive ; but the benefice, which is a perpetual right, and the 
 obligation of the benefice, have nothing to do with the 
 division of the proceeds of one or another year. 
 
 " Is he, who is absent for the purpose of study, or by dis- 
 pensation, or for other reasons, on account of which he de- 
 rives no returns from his benefice, delivered from the burden 
 of reading the Canonical hours 7 
 
 " Ans. No : because the defect is not owing to the bene- 
 fice ; indeed the beneficiate is not exonerated, although he 
 should substitute in his place an alternate, who frequents the 
 
300 CANONICAL HOURS. 
 
 choir and recites the hours, and bears the other burdens of 
 the benefice, &c. 
 
 " Hence, observe that the obligation of the beneficiate to 
 recite the Canonical hours is personal, and therefore requires 
 the beneficiate's own agency," &c. (No. 33.) 
 
 What a wretched perversion of the sacred privilege of 
 prayer is this ! The very Priests are taught to regard their 
 devotions as a grievous task ! Is it any wonder then that 
 the Scriptural adage " Like Priest, like people," should be 
 verified ? These holy men speak of being " delivered from 
 the burden of reading the Canonical hours ! !" Bless God, 
 Christian, that you have not received the Spirit of bondage, 
 but the Spirit of adoption, whereby you cry, Abba, Father ! 
 
 No. 36. treats " Of Restitution for the omission of the 
 Canonical hours." The amount which the negligent bene- 
 ficiate is obliged to pay has been determined by a Bull of 
 Leo X., A. D. 1514, which decree Pius V., A. D. 1571, 
 renewed and amplified j the substance of which is the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 " We being desirous to provide more evidently and ex- 
 pressly for this thing, resolve, that he who has intermitted 
 the Canonical hours for one or more days, shall lose all the 
 proceeds of his benefice or benefices, which correspond to 
 that day, or to those days, if they should be daily divided ; 
 but he who omits the matin only, shall lose the half; he 
 who omits all the other hours, the other half; he who omits 
 single ones of these, loses the sixth part of the proceeds of 
 the same day," &c., &c. 
 
 In No. 37, the following question is asked : 
 
 " Is a parish priest, who omits the Canonical hours on 
 one day, obliged to restore all the proceeds of that day ac- 
 cording to the proportion above explained, if on the same 
 day, he has discharged many pastoral functions ; when the 
 Priest receives the same proceeds also on account of pas- 
 toral duty ? 
 
 ** We answer that he is obliged to restore all the proceeds 
 according to the positive law of the constitution of Pius V. : 
 and it may be said that this law, by way of punishment, de- 
 
CANONICAL HOURS. 301 
 
 prives the Priest also of the control of that part of the 
 proceeds, which appertains to the pastoral service. 
 
 " Yet, by divine or natural law, he is not deprived of this 
 part of the proceeds, and therefore if we regard natural 
 right, not all the proceeds must be restored in the case laid 
 down : because some are due to him on account of pastoral 
 duty : and this division may take place in the first six 
 months from the time of obtaining a parochial or otherwise 
 onerous benefice. 
 
 " Hence, observe it would seem that this axiom — ' Bene- 
 fice is waived for the sake of duty,' should be understood 
 not only concerning the office of the canonical hours, but 
 concerning all other functions and burdens annexed to the 
 benefice. Thus, Suarez and Billuart, &c., say that it is 
 more plausible that a priest omitting an office may retain 
 part of the proceeds for the pastoral duty which he has per- 
 formed." 
 
 No. 39. A Case in point. 
 
 " A beneficiate throws away his breviary, that he may not 
 read the canonical hours this week ; but being sorry for this 
 deed, cannot get any other breviary : it is asked, 
 
 " Whether this inability of reciting the canonical hours 
 excuses from the restitution of the proceeds ? 
 
 " Ans. It does not excuse : because this inability proceeds 
 from open fraud ; but the fraud ought not to be excused in 
 him. 
 
 " Olj. I. Fraud is not excused in him, but inability. 
 
 " Ans. As this inability proceeds from fraud, thus the 
 excuse proceeds originally from fraud. 
 
 " Ohj. 11. The omission of the hours after penitence is 
 involuntary in him ; therefore it excuses from restitution. 
 
 " Ans. The omission is involuntary in him in regard to 
 the will then present, so that he does not sin more. I admit 
 the omission is involuntary in regard to the will by which 
 he occasioned it, but I deny the antecedent ; for that omission 
 was voluntary and directly intended, in throwing away the 
 breviary, which is sufficient to occasion the obligation of res- 
 titution ; just as unjust injuries, which have been voluntary 
 in the cause, ought to be repaired." 
 
302 CANONICAL HOURS. 
 
 Another Case. 
 
 " A beneficiate, through drunkenness, or through a serious 
 fault, has contracted a sickness by which he is rendered 
 unable to recite the canonical hours ; it is asked, whether he 
 may be excused from restitution of the proceeds 1 
 
 " Ans. Casuists solve this case by a distinction: if he has 
 done it for the sake of fraud, or with the intention that he 
 "may not recite the hours, he is not excused from restitution, 
 for reasons alleged in the former case. — La Croix, lib. 4, 
 V. 1, 210. 
 
 *' But if it happens without fraud they excuse him from 
 restitution on the plea of impotence ; indeed, they adjudge to 
 the same the daily distributions and residence. The reason 
 assigned is, ' that sickness is from Godj and the superiors 
 ought not to make inquiry concerning him, but leave him to 
 the judgment of God, lest affliction be added to the scourged ;" 
 &c. 
 
 Concerning the Sin of the Omission of the Canonical 
 Hours. (No. 40.) 
 
 " What kind of sin is it to omit the canonical hours, with 
 respect to him who, by the precept of the Church, is bound 
 to recite them ? 
 
 " Ans. It is a sin against the virtue of religion ; because 
 the law enjoining the canonical hours has been introduced 
 and passed formally for the purpose of religion : for the 
 recitation of the canonical hours is commanded as an act of 
 religion. 
 
 "Moreover, a rather probable opinion teaches, that the 
 beneficiate sins in addition against commutative justice, and 
 therefore that by omitting the canonical hours he sins with 
 a twofold oflfence ; and hence, he is obliged to declare that 
 condition of the benefice in confession, and is bound to make 
 restitution, &c. 
 
 " What meaning, therefore, has this axiom : * Benefice is 
 waived for the sake of duty.' 
 
 " Ans. This meaning, that the right of receiving the pro- 
 ceeds is given as a just stipend of support for the recitation 
 of the divine office, or the annexed spiritual functions. By 
 no means does it suffer that meaning, that the proceeds of 
 
CANONICAL HOURS. 303 
 
 the benefice are given as the hire of spiritual duty, which 
 sounds like simony," &c. 
 
 Concerning the Grievousness of the Sin of the Omission 
 of the Canonical Hours. (No. 41.) 
 
 " How great a sin is the omission of the canonical hours ? 
 
 " It is a sin, from its very nature, mortal : but the common 
 opinion declares, that the omission of one little canonical 
 hour, V. g., of the third, is sufficient matter for mortal sin. 
 
 " This is proved more from the common opinion and prac- 
 tice of the faithful, than from any law or reason. 
 
 " Huygens indeed, otherwise rigid, here liberal, attempts 
 to prove with many arguments that the omission of a little 
 canonical hour does not constitute a serious matter : but in a 
 thing of such moment we ought not to recede from the com- 
 mon opinion ; and from him we also learn that the omission of 
 one of the shorter psalms is not a serious matter. Suarez adds : 
 if any one should omit nearly the half of the Completorium, 
 I should not dare affirm that he sins mortally. 
 
 " He who should omit vespers on the Holy Sabbbath 
 should be judged to have sinned mortally, if not from the 
 seriousness of the matter, certainly from contempt. 
 
 " Small quantities omitted in distinct hours of the same 
 day, coalesce, and if together they amount to the quantity 
 of one little canonical hour, they will again constitute a mat- 
 ter sufficient for deadly sin. The quantities of distinct days 
 do not coalesce, because they have not respect to the same 
 singular precept. 
 
 " Does the omission of all the seven hours of one day con- 
 tain seven sins or a single one 1 
 
 " Ans. It is more correctly said to be one external sin, 
 equivalent to seven ; and therefore to contain a circumstance 
 to be explained in confession ; because several hours are as 
 it were integral parts of the enjoined office, just as the theft 
 of seven patacones is one sin ; internal sins, however, may 
 be multiplied." 
 
SOi CANONICAL HOURS. 
 
 Concerning the causes which excuse from the recitation 
 of the Canonical Hours. (No. 42.) 
 
 These three are specified. 
 
 "1. Inability, physical or moral; 2. Necessity, or a 
 ■duty of justice or charity ; 3. The dispensation of the 
 Pope. 
 
 " To inability are referred natural inadvertence, blameless 
 forget fulness, also infirmity, in which, without serious diffi- 
 culty or inconvenience, the hours could not be recited. A 
 slight infirmity, which does not hinder the ordinary actions 
 of the head or tongue, such as a moderate pain of the head 
 or stomach is, does not excuse. 
 
 " The danger itself, or the fear of a grievous evil, of death, 
 relapse into sickness or debilities, &c., can afford a rational 
 ground of excuse ; as the laws of the church ordinarily are 
 not obligatory in such a danger. In a doubtful case, we 
 must abide by the decision of a physician or a prudent man. 
 
 *' A duty of charity excuses from the reading of the hours, 
 v. g., if, in an unforeseen case, the whole remaining part of 
 the day must be spent in administering the last sacraments 
 to a dying person. 
 
 " The employment of preparing a sermon, or a similar 
 function, does not excuse from the recitation of a divine of- 
 fice. 
 
 " Observe, that the above-mentioned causes may at one 
 time excuse from the recitation of one canonical hour, yet so 
 that they do not excuse from the recitation of the others ; be- 
 cause the office of the hours is not prescribed as an indivisi- 
 ble whole ; for a part may present the consideration of a no- 
 table prayer. This is confirmed from this 54th prop., con- 
 demned by Innoc. XI. * He who cannot recite the matin and 
 the praises, but can recite the remaining hours, is under no 
 obligation, because the greater part draws to itself the less.' 
 
 *' Hence, if any blind person, or one who is without a bre- 
 viary, knows from memory how to recite some hours, or a 
 considerable part, he is obliged to recite them ; the case would 
 be different if he could only recite very small disconnected 
 parts ; for then neither the end nor the substantial form of 
 the precept could be preserved : yet, if with a companion he 
 Is able to recite it entire, he is bound to do so." 
 
CANONICAL HOURS. 305 
 
 If about noon a fever is expected, the time of reciting the 
 hours must be anticipated ; and so if any other obstacle is 
 Hkely to intervene. Excommunication, suspension, degra- 
 dation, or any other spiritual punishment, not even impris- 
 onment, nor condemnation to the galleys can excuse from 
 the duty of reciting the canonical hours. A dispensation or 
 commutation which shall validly excuse from this act of de- 
 votion must come from the Pope. 
 
 As to the manner of reciting the hours, it must be devout 
 and studious. " The office is studiously recited, when it is 
 performed, entirely and distinctly, without abridgment, mu- 
 tilation, or interruption. 
 
 " It is devoutly recited, when it is recited with religious 
 intention and attention. The intention is the act of the will ; 
 but attention is the act of the intellect," &c. 
 
 As to the place, the prayer which is offered in the temple 
 is more profitable. (No. 43.) 
 
 Concerning the requisite intention in the recitation of the 
 Canonical Hours. (No. 44.) 
 
 " This intention is the will or purpose of reciting the di- 
 vine office as such. 
 
 " Is this intention absolutely necessary ? 
 
 " Yes : because the church enjoins the recitation of the 
 office as an exercise of certain religious acts ; but without 
 this intention, the recitation would not contain that exercise ; 
 therefore, this intention is necessary. Hence, he who reads 
 the office merely materially from the intention only to study 
 or commit it to memory, or to know the histories, does not 
 satisfy the obligation of the precept of the church, because 
 the intention of worshipping God, of praise, of prayer, &c., 
 is wanting. Thus Suarez, Wiggers, Antoine, and La Croix 
 teach," &c. &c. 
 
 The following sections treat of the attention requisite in 
 prayer ; of distraction ; of distraction indirectly voluntary ; 
 of the sin of distraction. In No. 50, which treats "Of other 
 defects occurring in the recitation of the canonical hours," 
 we find this question : 
 
 " Ought the person reciting the office to hear himself, as 
 many scholastics crudely declare? 
 26 
 
30^ CANONICAL HOURS. 
 
 " Ans. This is wont to be the torment of the scrupulous : 
 it may be said with Benac, &c., that it is not necessary that 
 he should perceive his voice with his own ears as, v. g., hap- 
 pens, when the organs of sound are acted upon ; but that is 
 enough, if the words, by the allision of the air against the 
 teeth and lips, are so formed that the reciter pronounces sen- 
 sibly in his mouth all the words, and perceives it by an in- 
 ternal hearing as it were ; and this is sufficient for vocal 
 prayer, although the external voice may not be heard : be- 
 cause the hearing is not noticed ; nor do I practically see 
 any, except, perhaps, the scrupulous, tormented, and dis-" 
 tressed in this matter; for thus the deaf, and those who shut 
 their ears, may afford satisfaction." 
 
 The faithful are then cautioned against too great celerity 
 and anxious slowness, in reciting the canonical hours, 
 &c., &c. 
 
 " What advantage does this prayer, SacrosancttB, <Sfc., 
 afford with a Pater and Ave, when it is said after the reci- 
 tation of the office ? 
 
 " Ans. Leo X. remitted, byway of indulgence, to him who 
 says it, the defects and faults contracted in the recitation of 
 the office, namely, the venial ones, adds Billuart ; so that he 
 may relieve from the task of repeating the things thus recited. 
 
 "Do not, therefore, these defects, v. g., committed in the 
 recitation of the matin, if after the matin, some one should 
 say Sacrosanctcs, <^c., coalesce with the defects which one 
 commits afterwards on the same day, in the recitation of the 
 first, third, &c. ? 
 
 " Ans. According to the above-mentioned explanation, it 
 must be said, that they would not coalesce : because a person 
 thus reciting has been freed from all the preceding burden, 
 just as if he had recited all correctly. I3ut it ought to be 
 said with a contrite heart : for an indulgence supposes that 
 the fault is remitted." 
 
 Concerning the time of reciting the canonical hours. 
 
 (No. 58.) 
 
 " The time of reciting the canonical hours, runs from mid- 
 night, that is, from the twelfth hour of one night, to the twelfth 
 hour of the following night ; after twelve, the obligation of the 
 precept ceases : for this burden passes with the day, because 
 
CANONICAL HOURS. 307 
 
 the time is determined for finishing the obligation, and the 
 obh'gation of the precept is distributed through single days. 
 
 " By legitimate custom, the permission has been introduced 
 to recite the matin and the praises of the office of the follow- 
 ing day, on the preceding evening, and thus from the time 
 at which the sun is nearer to* setting, than to midday, as is 
 plain from the table concerning the time of beginning the 
 matin, published A. D. 1706, at Rome, with the type of the 
 apostolic chamber. According to this calculation, it is per- 
 mitted in Belgium, in midsummer, to begin in the seventh 
 minute after the fourth hour, in the afternoon, because the 
 sun then sets with us at twelve minutes past eight ; in the midst 
 of winter, at five minutes before the second hour ; and in 
 each equinox, after the third hour. 
 
 " Here, beware of the 35 Prop, among those condemned 
 by Alex. VII. : ' Any one may by a single office satisfy a 
 double precept for the present day and for to-morrow.' 
 
 " Ohj. This liberty does not seem reasonable, because the 
 person reciting the matin in the evening, at the second feria 
 will be obliged to say a falsehood in the hymn, ' With limbs 
 refreshed with sleep, we rise from the spurned bed ;' there- 
 fore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the antecedent and the proof: for such 
 words are referred figuratively to the legitimate time, and thus 
 are not false. 
 
 " Moreover, in the choir, certain times are assigned for the 
 separate offices of the hours, which it is necessary to observe 
 under grievous sin, according to the custom of the same 
 church : not so out of the choir, in private recitation ; but yet 
 out of the choir, it will be considered a venial offence if the 
 office, as far as the first, is not said before noon : because 
 custom and the propriety of the office require this : there- 
 fore, the accurate time of reciting the matin is about night ; 
 very early it is proper to recite the prajses and the first : in 
 the subsequent time, the other little hours ; vespers are said 
 after noon, Lent excepted. To anticipate this time, or defer 
 till after it, is nothing objectionable ; as is mentioned ch. 2, 
 concerning the celebration of the mass," &c. 
 
308 OF THE SIGN OF THE CROSS. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX. 
 
 CONCERNING THE SIGN OF THE CROSS. 
 
 " The sign of the cross is called by our catechism, lesson 
 2, by way of distinction, the sign of a Christian man; for in 
 every age, Christians have distinguished themselves from 
 infidels, by making the sign of the cross. 
 
 " The same catechism denotes 2d, a two-fold manner of 
 marking one's self with the cross. 
 
 " The first is that by which a person touches himself on 
 the forehead with the right hand, the fingers being extended 
 and joined, and the palm being turned towards him, saying : 
 In the name of the Father ; then he lets his hand down be- 
 low the breast, saying : and of the Son ; from there he moves 
 his hand to the left side of his breast, and immediately trans- 
 fers it to the right side, saying at the same time : and of the 
 Holy Ghost ; whilst he adds Amen, he joins his hands be- 
 fore the breast. 
 
 " The second mode is that by which one describes a cross 
 with the thumb on the forehead, saying : In the name of the 
 Father ; and over the mouth, saying : and of the Son ; and 
 over the breast, saying : and of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 " This mode we use at the reading of the gospel, by which 
 we profess that we bear the faith and the gospel in the mind, 
 in the mouth, and in the heart, or afl^ections. 
 
 " The catechism above-mentioned observes 3d, that in form- 
 mg the sign of the cross, we profess the principal myste- 
 ries of our faith, viz. The mysteries of the most holy Trinity, 
 the incarnation, and the passion of Jesus Christ, and our re- 
 demption. 
 
 " Show in what way we profess the mystery of the most 
 holy Trinity. 
 
 " Ans. By saying : Of the Father, and of the Son, and 
 of the Holy Ghost, we profess three divine persons, and that 
 they are distinct among themselves, by the interjection and : 
 by saying in the name in the singular, and not in the names, 
 we profess one and the same nature, or the divine essence of 
 
OF THE SIGN OF THE CROSS. 309 
 
 those persons, and therefore that they are one God : for the 
 name does not denote any word, but signifies the divine virtue, 
 povi^er, and essence, as if it were said, In the virtue, in the 
 power, in the majesty of the Father, &c. 
 
 " Moreover, when we draw the hand from the forehead 
 below the breast, we profess that the Father through intellect 
 generates the Son from eternity : and when in drawing the 
 hand from the left side to the right, we join the lines of the 
 cross, we profess that the Holy Spirit is the bond and love 
 of the Father and the Son, and proceeds from them. 
 
 " We profess the mystery of the incarnation of Jesus 
 Christ : viz., by placing the hand from the forehead below 
 the breast, we profess that the Son of God descended from 
 the bosom of the Father into the womb of the Virgin, and 
 assumed human nature ; thus, both Christ's generations are 
 here signified, either his eternal nativity from the Father, or 
 the temporal from his mother. 
 
 " We profess the mystery of our redemption, and of the 
 passion of the Lord Christ, when we draw forward the hand 
 from the left side to the right side, and at the same time 
 make the cross : for in this is signified that the Lord Christ, 
 by his cross and passion, has brought us from a state of 
 damnation to a state of salvation. 
 
 " For what causes, and to what purposes do we use the 
 sign of the cross ? 
 
 " With the Mechlin Catechism we reply, we use it for the 
 exercise of virtues; for it contains, 1. an act of faith and 
 of profession of the faith of the principal mysteries, as has 
 been shown above. 
 
 2. It contains an act of religion ; for it is a short and 
 most efficacious prayer to God through the merits of the 
 passion of Christ, by which we invoke the help of God in 
 all cases : it contains also a reference to God of the works 
 to which it is prefixed. 
 
 " We use the sign of the cross against all temptations, and 
 molestations of evil spirits ; for the devil greatly fears and 
 flees from the cross, by which he has been overcome. Thus 
 St. Antonius. 
 
 " We exhibit the sign of the cross about temporal things 
 in blessing them, or averting evils from them ; thus we bless 
 food, clothes, houses, &c. St. Benedict with the sign of the 
 26 * 
 
310 OF THE SIGN OF THE CROSS. 
 
 cross BEOKE IN PIECES A POISONED CUP ; St. Rochus, by a 
 little sign of the cross cured those infected with the 
 PLAGUE. Examples of the virtue and efficacy of the sign 
 of the cross, you will find in Hazart, Turlot, Marchant, 
 &c., &c. 
 
 " From these remarks, it is plain to what salutary effect 
 we may use this sign of the holy cross, frequently through 
 the day, and before all business. 
 
 " From what time has the sign of the cross been in 
 vogue ? 
 
 " Ans. From the time of the apostles and of Christ him- 
 self, says the Mechlinian Catechism. 
 
 " Tertullian, a most ancient writer towards the close of 
 the second century, has these words, lib. de Corona Militis, 
 c. 3. 'At every progress and moving forward, at every 
 going in and going out, in clothing ourselves and putting on 
 our shoes, at the bath, at table, at the lights, at the bed- 
 chambers, at the seats, wherever business engages us, we 
 rub the forehead with the little sign of the cross.' 
 
 " St. Jerome to Eustochius : ' At every action, at every 
 step, let the hand describe the cross.' 
 
 " Many similar testimonies from the Holy Fathers, Augus- 
 tine, Chrysostom, Gregory, &c., you will find produced by 
 Hazart, Catech. less. 4., Turlot, Catech. I. 4 and 5 ; so that 
 the temerity of the Calvinists, who abrogate the use of the 
 sign of the cross, is insane. 
 
 " In the Old Testament, the figure of the little sign of the 
 holy cross is 'found Ezek. ix., where they are forbidden to 
 be slain whose foreheads were marked by the sign Thau, or 
 T, which designates the cross. 
 
 " Ohj. The cross brought shame and sorrow to Christ : 
 therefore, the sign of the cross is rather to be held in abhor- 
 rence than to be venerated or honoured : because the son 
 does not honour the gibbet on which his father has been 
 hanged. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : because the cross and its 
 sign are not honoured by us in so far as the cross was em- 
 ployed for ignominy by the crucifiers, but inasmuch as the 
 cross was voluntarily assumed by Christ as the instrument 
 of our redemption, and the sign of his triumph and victory 
 over sin and the devil. 
 
OF THE SIGN OF THE CROSS. 31 1 
 
 " For proof, I say, that there is a disparity, because the 
 gibbet affords to the father, neither triumph, nor victory, nor 
 honour. 
 
 " Why do we venerate all figures of the cross, of what- 
 ever material prepared, but not all nails? 
 
 " Because the sign of the cross everywhere presents the 
 passion and victory of the Lord Christ ; but this all nails do 
 not." 
 
 If Christ and his apostles authorized the use of the sign 
 of the cross, and were in the habit of employing it, as we 
 learn from the foregoing remarks, it is very strange that the 
 sacred writers are utterly silent on this subject. We do not 
 read that they ever undertook to cast out devils, or heal 
 diseases by this potent charm ; much less that they blessed 
 their raiment or their food by making the sign of the cross. 
 That St. Benedict broke in pieces a poisoned cup, and St. 
 Rochus cured those who were afflicted with the plague, by 
 making the sign of the cross, are facts which of course are 
 not to be questioned by any but infidels. We may perhaps, 
 however, be permitted to say, that if there is any priest or 
 saint, in these ends of the earth, who believes that there is 
 such potency in the use of this sign, we shall be glad to 
 afford him a public opportunity of testing its virtue on any 
 sound piece of poisoned crockery, just so soon as he is 
 prepared to make the experiment. How their reverences 
 can reconcile it to their consciences to suffer so many cases 
 of small pox and yellow fever to terminate fatally, when 
 they have such a remedy at hand, and have free access to 
 the hospitals, is strange, very strange, indeed ! The man 
 who boasted that he had leaped fifty feet at Rhodes, was 
 told, " make the same leap here, and we will believe you" — 
 when we see a priest or a saint break a cup by the sign of 
 the cross, we shall be ready to believe that it has been done. 
 Till then, « credat Judeeus Apella !" 
 
312 CONCERNING MAGIC. 
 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 Concerning Magic. (No. 190.) 
 
 " The word Magi, among the Greeks, formerly signified 
 wise men ; in which way it is understood, Mai. ii. ver. 1 : 
 * Wise men (Magi) came from the east ;' hence, magic is 
 divided into natural and superstitious. 
 
 "What is superstitious magic? 
 
 " Ans. It is the art of effecting wonderful results by signs 
 through the aid of the devil. Suarez places the observance 
 of cures under the head of magic. 
 
 " But the devil, the rival of God, has instituted certain 
 magical signs in imitation of Christ's instituting the sacra- 
 ments. 
 
 " Observe again, that the fundamental reason of all that 
 is to be said depends on this, that magical signs do not pro- 
 duce those effects, either from the nature of the thing, or 
 from the appointment of God or the church ; therefore, by 
 the influence of the devil. 
 
 " Superstitious magic is divided into magic, properly so 
 called, or not hurtful, and into hurtful or witchcraft, which 
 therefore has a twofold malice, both against religion and 
 against justice. 
 
 " Witchcraft is subdivided into amatory, by which car- 
 
 , nal love or hatred is excited : and into sorcery, for inflicting 
 
 diseases or other injuries upon men, animals, fruits, &;c. ; 
 
 but the devil can do very many things which relate to local 
 
 motion. 
 
 Concerning Magical Signs, and the remedies against 
 Magic. (No. 191.) 
 
 " What do you call a magical sign? 
 
 "That which they exhibit or lay down according to an 
 agreement, at least implicit with the devil, which being pro- 
 duced, the devil procures the effect. 
 
 " This sign sometimes consists in words, and is called in- 
 cantation; sometimes in a permanent thing, as straw, pots, 
 
CONCERNING MAGIC. 313 
 
 strings, bars, &c., v. g., straw plaited in a certain way is 
 hidden in the earth in order to kill animals ; so long as that 
 appointed sign of straw continues, the devil does injury to 
 the cattle, unless he be hindered by exorcisms, or in some 
 other way. 
 
 " May evil spirits, therefore, injure certain people ? 
 
 " Ans. No : unless God permits it to them, as is plain 
 from the history of Job. Yet, when the devil has the aid 
 of some person, who co-operates, then God frequently per- 
 mits this to the devil ; because then the human race is thought 
 to injure itself. 
 
 " Are those things which sometimes appear through ma- 
 gic art really such; or are they legerdemain and fantastic? 
 
 " I reply with St. Thomas, that these things sometimes 
 appear truly, and sometimes by means of trick : in the form- 
 er mode, the sorcerers, Exod. viii., brought real frogs upon 
 the earth ; in the latter way, the transmutations of men into 
 cats or beasts appear ; because these cannot be effected by 
 the power of the devil, but they are done through the illu- 
 sions of the senses, or through forms portrayed in the air. 
 
 " Likewise the apparitions of the dead through incanta- 
 tions are false ; so that if any one appears, he is a devil, and 
 not the soul of a deceased person. We admit, indeed, that 
 Samuel, 1 Kgs. xxviii., truly appeared, according to Eccli. 
 xlvi. ; but by the special appointment of God for the reproof 
 of Saul. 
 
 " What are the remedies against magic 1 
 
 " Ans. A lively faith, and great confidence in God. Ps. 
 xc. 
 
 " 2. The frequent use of the Sacraments. 
 
 " 3. Prayer and fasting, the sign of the cross, the invoca- 
 tion of the name of Jesus and the Saints. 
 
 " 4. The exorcisms of the church, the use of blessed 
 water, the exhibition of holy relics, &c. 
 
 " 5. The use of natural medicines against diseases or 
 evils of this kind. 
 
 " 6. The lawful destruction of the magical sign : v. g. by 
 burning the straw or papers, by breaking the pots," &c. 
 
 " Is it lawful to destroy the magical signs of witchcraft, 
 and in what way ? (192.) 
 
 " Certainly it is unlawful to destroy them by any other 
 
314 CONCERNING MAGIC. 
 
 witchcraft, or by any other superstitious act : because it is 
 not lawful to do evil that good may come. 
 
 " It is certainly lawful to destroy magical signs with the 
 intention and aim that sins may be diminished, and for the 
 detestation and hatred of magical iniquity, in the same way 
 as it is lawful to destroy idols. But the question is mooted, 
 
 " Whether it is lawful to destroy these magical signs for 
 the sole purpose that the injury may cease? 
 
 " This question is more speculative than practical ; be- 
 cause by destroying, the purpose of detesting the diabolical 
 art may easily be intended : however, 
 
 " Delrio, Suarez, Wiggers, Boudart, and others, maintain 
 the affirmative answer, because the object is honourable and 
 proportionate, against Hesselius, Estius, and Sylvius. Delrio 
 also observes that Hesselius was the first who contradicted 
 this opinion : but the principal argument of Hesselius upon 
 which the others depend is this following : 
 
 " Ohj, He who destroys a magical sign that the injury 
 may cease, does not expect the effect of cessation from God, 
 nor from any cause, natural or human : therefore he ex- 
 pects it from the agreement of the devil. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the antecedent ; for the sign being destroy- 
 ed, the efTect is expected from God, not by a miracle, but 
 from his ordinary providence, by which he does not usually 
 permit that the devil should inflict injury upon men, after the 
 magical sign is destroyed. But this destructive action is 
 honourable from its object and end : for it is just to destroy 
 the works of the devil, 1 John iii. 8. * For this purpose the 
 Son of God appeared, that he might destroy the works of 
 the devil.' And because he who destroys the magical sign 
 does not fulfil the compact of the devil, but rather destroys 
 it ; and for this reason we think the same is lawful, although 
 the magical sign should consist in something negative or 
 privative. 
 
 " Is it lawful to ask a sorcerer to take away the spell ? 
 
 " It is lawful, on condition that he takes it away in a law- 
 ful manner. 
 
 " If it is foreseen that he will do it by magic art, it is not 
 permitted to ask : indeed, if any magician should of his own 
 accord, offer to destroy the spell by magical or superstitious 
 art, it is lawful neither to accept nor to permit it. 
 
CONCERNING MAGIC. 315 
 
 " The reason is, because it is not lawful to accept a benefit 
 from the devil ; because this involves a certain fellowship 
 with the devil, and a recognition of his excellence as a bene- 
 factor through his own compact. 
 
 " ObJ. It is lawful simply to ask a loan from an usurer, 
 and an oath from one who will swear by false gods ; there- 
 fore it is lawful to seek the destruction of witchcraft from a 
 wizard, at least when he can destroy it in a lawful manner. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : there is a reason of disparity, 
 because it is lawful to receive benefits even from sinful men, 
 but not from the devil, for the above-mentioned reason : hence 
 St. Leo : ' The benefits of devils are more injurious than 
 wounds.'" 
 
 Rules for discerning Witchcraft. (No. 193.) 
 
 " From what things can it be discerned, whether an evil 
 proceeds from witchcraft, or from some other cause? 
 
 " Ans. This discrimination is sometimes difficult : how- 
 ever, these marks of witchcraft are usually assigned. 
 
 "1. If the evil exceeds the natural or ordinary causality 
 of things; v. g., if hair, bones, needles, bits of iron, &c., are 
 found in the stomach. 
 
 " 2. If the afflicted person suffers violence, by intervals, as 
 it were. 
 
 " 3. If skilful physicians are confidently of opinion that 
 the evil does not proceed from a natural cause : if medicines, 
 and other natural means, produce no effect. 
 
 " 4. If spiritual means and exorcisms are seen to be spe- 
 cially advantageous ; or, on the other hand, if when they are 
 employed, the evil appears to be increased on their account ,* 
 in which case we are not to cease, but more boldly to perse- 
 vere with all spiritual means. 
 
 " You will find more on these subjects in Malderus, Tract. 
 10. dub. 15, and Neesen, Tract 9. De DcBmoniacis." 
 
 This chapter presents a specimen of the present fanaticism 
 and foolery of the Church of Rome. Exorcisms are con- 
 stantly performed by their priests, and evil spirits are made 
 to flee before the sign of the cross, the sprinkling of holy 
 water, the exhibition of sacred relics, &c. &c. ! ! We cer- 
 
316 • OF LYING. 
 
 tainly believe that evil spirits exist, and that the prince of 
 darkness exerts a fearful power over the children of disobe- 
 dience, and we should be rejoiced if the exorcisms of Romish 
 priests possessed infinitely more virtue than the credulous 
 faithful believe, for then there would be strong evidence that 
 the kingdom of Satan would speedily be overthrown ; as a 
 house divided against itself cannot stand ! As matters are at 
 present, we apprehend, the Devil never feels greater satisfac- 
 tion than when the priests aim at him a quantum suff. of holy 
 water, and exhibit the musty rags, dry bones, &c., which 
 are facetiously called " sacred relics !" 
 
 CHAPTER XXXI. 
 
 Concerning Lying and its division. (No. 242.) 
 
 " The vice opposed to the virtue of truth, is the habit of 
 lying ; yet lying is used more frequently for the act of this 
 vice, and is thus defined : * Speaking contrary to the mind of 
 the speaker.' 
 
 " tinder speaking is comprehended every external sign 
 whatsoever ; and thus we can lie by writing, by gestures, 
 nods, or other actions. 
 
 " May any one lie, whilst speaking a thing that is true ? 
 
 *' Ans. Yes : if he supposes in his mind that it is false : on 
 the other hand, one who speaks a falsehood does not lie, if 
 he prudently believes it to be true : the reason is that he does 
 not speak against his mind : yet any one may be guilty of 
 the fault of lying, if through defect of due investigation, 
 through precipitancy or much speaking, he exposes himself 
 to the danger of saying what is false. 
 
 " How is falsehood divided ? 
 
 *' It is divided, by reason of the fault and of the object, into 
 officious, jocose^ and pernicious. 
 
 " Lying is called officious, which is committed only on ac- 
 count of one's own advantage or that of another : v. g., some 
 
OF LYING. 317 
 
 one says that he has no money, that he may not be robbed 
 of it by soldiers. 
 
 " Jocose is that which is committed only for the sake of 
 sport : V. g., some one lies that he is a Mechlinian, that he 
 may provoke to laughter. 
 
 " Lying is called pernicious^ which, besides the wicked- 
 ness of lying, has some injury or evil adjoined, from which 
 it contracts other wickedness : therefore, all pernicious lies 
 are not of the same kind, but they assume an appearance of 
 wickedness from the injury or evil from which they are 
 called pernicious : thus a pernicious falsehood, by which de- 
 traction from the reputation of a neighbour through the im- 
 putation of something false is occasioned, has the wickedness 
 of injustice ; lying against the faith is pernicious, and assumes 
 malice against the faith." 
 
 Pernicious lying is from, its nature, a mortal sin ; offi- 
 cious and jocose lying, are from their nature, venial sins. 
 
 May Lying he lawful in any case 7 (No. 243.) 
 
 ** Plato, Origen, and some ancients, thought so ; but the 
 negative answer is certain ; the reason is because all lying 
 is intrinsically evil, and forbidden by the natural law ; for 
 words are naturally the signs of the understanding, says St. 
 Thomas. The same is proved from the Holy Fathers, Am- 
 brose, Augustine, &c. ; and it is said, Eccl. vii. 14, *Be not 
 willing to make any manner of lie.' 
 
 " Ohj. Out of two evils the less is to be chosen ; therefore, 
 it is lawful to lie, v. g., to avoid homicide. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : because to lie is a formal 
 sin : and thus to lie is a greater evil than to permit homicide 
 merely permissively. And, according to the apostle, Rom. 
 iii. 8, it is not lawful to do evil that good may come. 
 
 " Therefore, it is not lawful to lie in order to avert death 
 or the ruin of the state or any other evils : in perplexities of 
 this kind, men should betake themselves to the help of God, 
 of their guardian angel, &c." 
 
 Concerning mental Restriction. (No 244.) 
 
 " Mental restriction is twofold : purely mental, and not 
 purely mental, or real. 
 
 " Real restriction occurs, when the declaration is false ; if 
 27 
 
318 OF LYING. 
 
 we regard the words alone : but circumstances concur which 
 signify that something is to be secretly understood, which 
 the speaker keeps in his mind, and which being secretly un- 
 derstood, the declaration is true : v. g., John, desiring forth- 
 with in the market to speak to Peter, asks of Paul : ' Have 
 you seen Peter V Paul replies, ^ I have not seen him,^ although 
 he has seen him yesterday, or four hours ago. 
 
 "This reply or. real restriction does not contain a lie, be- 
 cause by the circumstance of John's asking forthwith to 
 speak to Peter, he is restricted to the immediate time ; but 
 now not the words alone make the declaration true, but also 
 external circumstances, or concomitant signs, custom, &c., 
 are likewise significant. 
 
 " Hence infer, how it is that metaphors, hyperbole, and 
 other rhetorical figures, do not involve falsehoods. 
 
 " A purely mental restriction is committed, when a de- 
 claration is made, which, considering all the external circum- 
 stances and signs, is false, but to which in the mind of the 
 speaker something is internally added or secretly understood, 
 by which it would become true, which internal thing is yet 
 manifested or made known by no sign ; v. g., John being 
 asked, whether he has seen Peter to-day, whom he had in 
 reality seen, replies, I have not seen him to-day, by secretly 
 understanding, in Spain, &c. 
 
 " Does purely mental restriction excuse from falsehood ? 
 
 " Ans. No : because this internal restriction is manifested 
 by no external sign ; and therefore is not signified with the 
 other; and thus the external declaration remains simply 
 
 " Moreover, by restriction purely mental, human society 
 would be disturbed in the same way as by falsehoods. 
 
 " It is proved also by the condemnation of this 26th pro- 
 position of Innocent XI., 'If any, either alone or before 
 others, whether asked, or of his own accord, or for the pur- 
 pose of sport, or for any other object, swears that he has not 
 done something which in reality he has done, by understand- 
 ing within himself something else, which he has not done, 
 or a different way from that in which he has done it, or any 
 other truth that is added, he does not really lie, nor is he 
 perjured.' 
 
 "La Croix, indeed, prudently admonishes, lib. 3. p. 1, n. 
 
OF LYING. 319 
 
 295, refuting restriction purely mental, that since the con- 
 dennnation of the aforesaid proposition, certain authors, who 
 wrotebefore the condennnation,areto be read cautiously: mean- 
 while, however, I do not clearly see how he himself. No. 228, 
 sufficiently differs from them, when he says that it is lawful 
 for a homicide, who is asked whether he has killed that man, 
 to reply, I have not killed him, by secretly understanding in 
 his mind, so that I ought to confess it to you; in the same 
 way that it is lawful to reply to one who asks whether a 
 robber has passed this way : he has not passed this way, if 
 he at the same time puts his hand into his glove, meaning 
 that he has not passed through the glove ; for this sign is 
 supposed to be secret, or not perceptible, so as to be signified 
 together with the rest ; just as the motion of the eyes in 
 speaking would not be a sufficient consignificant sign to be 
 secretly understood externally, he has not passed through 
 my eyes. 
 
 " However, if this thrusting of the hand into the glove 
 should be sufficiently manifest, and perceptibly or intelligibly 
 connected with words, then Boudart himself excuses the 
 reply from falsehood," &c. &c. 
 
 Concerning Ambiguity and Equivocation. (No. 245.) 
 
 " Is it proper to speak with ambiguity and equivocation? 
 
 " The case is this : a proposition or a word admits of two 
 senses or meanings : v. g., this proposition, ' Dico latronem 
 Petrum occidisse.' / say a robber killed Peter, may signify 
 that the robber has killed Peter ; and on the other hand, that 
 Peter has killed the robber. In the same way, the word 
 mundus may signify the globe, and cleanliness; hence this 
 declaration is equivocal : * Mundus non est mundus ;' (which 
 may signify either, the world is not a world, or the world 
 is not clean.'') 
 
 " An equivocation of this kind does not contain a lie, in 
 whatever sense it may be received ; because the external 
 words truly signify that sense, which the speaker has in his 
 mind ; and thus differs from a purely mental reservation, in 
 which the external words do not contain the mental sense. 
 
 " Therefore, it is proper for just reasons to use this in 
 either sense ; thus the angel, Tob. v. 18, said metaphorically ; 
 
320 OF LYING. 
 
 ' I am Azariasj the son of the great Ananias, that is, I am 
 the aid of the Lord, the adopted Son of God,' &c. 
 
 " Ohj. The person using such an equivocation intends to 
 cheat and deceive another : but this is contrary to the sin- 
 cerity of human society ; therefore, it is not lawful. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the assertion : but he intends to speak the 
 truth which he has in his mind : he permits the deception of 
 the other from his wrong understandings* and because a jus^ 
 cause is required that he may be excused from all sin. 
 
 " An opportune mode of getting rid of the importunate 
 questions of inquisitive men, is reciprocally to propose a ques- 
 tion : V. g., if they ask, whether you know this ? whether 
 you have done this ? you may reply, whence should I know 
 this ? why should I do this ? &c. In a similar way, Christ, 
 Luke xxiv. 19, to the question of the disciples going to Em- 
 maus, replied, saying : What things ?" 
 
 The closing remarks of this section plainly show that 
 equivocation is no sin, in the estimation of a disciple of Peter 
 Dens. This is no new discovery, and it is therefore not be- 
 coming that we should speak of it as something strange or 
 unexpected. A very little acquaintance with the practice of 
 the veracious pupils and admirers of Peter Dens, is sufficient 
 to teach us that they understand the art of equivocation to 
 perfection. But the horrid attempt to make the blessed Sa- 
 viour, whose title is, Faithful and True Witness, en- 
 courage the practice of this detestable vice, is blasphemy for 
 which we were not prepared. The very attempt at refuta- 
 tion would be irreverent. Let the reader turn to Luke xxiv. 
 19, and he will see that nothing could have been farther from 
 the Saviour's mind than the intention of furnishing a prece- 
 dent for the deceitful equivocations, which are the glory of 
 the Church of Rome ! 
 
OF FASTING. 321 
 
 CHAPTER XXXII. 
 
 Concerning Fastings and its division. (No. 254.) 
 
 PoLMAN explains several meanings of the word fastings 
 and thus he divides fasting into the philosophical^ medicinal^ 
 penitential, moral, spiritual, natural, and ecclesiastical. 
 
 " Spiritual or metaphorical fasting is to abstain from sins. 
 S. Aug. Treat. 17, on John. 
 
 " Moral fasting is abstinence from food and drink, accord- 
 ing to the dictate of natural reason, for a moral end, v. g., to 
 restrain concupiscence. This fasting may, by natural right 
 in itself, be obligatory upon every one, even an infidel, by the 
 force of the precept of temperance ; or through some circum- 
 stance, by reason of another virtue : for natural reason dic- 
 tates that every one ought to use a proper remedy for avoid- 
 ing sin : but this obvious remedy frequently is fasting : for 
 this reason, St. Thomas says, a. 3., that fasting in general 
 falls under the precept of natural right. 
 
 " Theologians here treat principally of the fasting which 
 falls under the precept of the church ; and they divide it into 
 natural and ecclesiastical fasting. 
 
 " What is natural fasting 1 
 
 " It is abstinence from all food and drink transmitted to the 
 stomach, or from every thing that is taken by way of food, 
 or drink, or medicine, from midnight. 
 
 " Observe that this natural fast which is enjoined before 
 taking the Eucharist, is not properly an act of the virtue of 
 abstinence or temperance, but an act of the virtue of religion : 
 because it is enjoined by the church for the purpose of 
 reverence to the sacrament : but an ecclesiastical fast is an 
 act of the virtue of abstinence." 
 
 Concerning Ecclesiastical Fasting. (No. 255.) 
 
 " What is an ecclesiastical fast ? 
 
 " It is on certain days, according to the custom and pre- 
 scription of the church, to abstain from meats under a single 
 
322 OF FASTING. 
 
 refreshment in the day, not to be taken before the proper 
 hour. 
 
 " Therefore an ecclesiastical fast contains three parts, viz. 
 1. Abstinence from meats, under which are understood, eggs, 
 and milk diet, which derive their origin from flesh ; 2, absti- 
 nence from more refreshments except a single one from other 
 food ; 3, that the appointed hour be not anticipated ; and thus 
 in this time, refreshment may not be taken before noon. 
 
 " Hence, it is plain that this fast may be violated in a three- 
 fold way, and thus mortal sin may be committed in a three- 
 fold manner; 1, by eating forbidden food; 2, by taking 
 several refreshments ; 3, by anticipating the hour of refresh- 
 ment. For this reason, he who confesses that he has broken 
 his fast, must be asked, which of the three parts of the fast 
 he has violated. 
 
 " Observe, that some fasts do not oblige to the observance 
 of these three parts : thus fasts on holidays and Sabbaths, 
 throughout the year, oblige to the mere abstinence from 
 meats, according to the custom of the place ; and fasts of the 
 days of Rogation do not forbid a second refreshment after 
 noon : but these fasts are called imperfect fasts." 
 
 Concerning the Quadragesimal Fast. (No. 256.) 
 
 " The quadragesimal fast is the most solemn throughout 
 the whole church, because it derives its origin from the Apos- 
 tles, in imitation of Christ ; although it has since then under- 
 gone various changes : for formerly, until the times of S. 
 Bernard, the fast was observed until evening ; in the thirteenth 
 century, in the time of S. Thomas, until the third hour in the 
 afternoon : a little after, from the time of Durandus ; and in 
 these times, it is permitted through custom to take a single 
 refreshment about noon, and a little collation in the evening. 
 The vestige of the ancient custom,is, however, still preserved 
 in the church, when, in Lent, vespers are sung before noon, 
 or before the refreshment. 
 
 " During the time of Lent, abstinence must be observed 
 also on the Lord's days occurring in it, not only from meats, 
 but also from eggs and milk diet, namely, butter, milk, cheese, 
 &c., which derive their origin from flesh ; by custom, how- 
 ever, in this country, in our day, the eating of milk diet is 
 permitted, except on a Cew days designated by the Bishop ; 
 
OF FASTING. 323 
 
 only this indulgence is compensated by certain prayers or 
 alms. Steyaert admits the real obligation of this, &c. 
 
 " On Lord's days in Lent, although abstinence from meats 
 must be observed, yet abstinence from several refreshments 
 is not obligatory ; nor is a certain hour of refreshment to be 
 observed. ^ Generally, on the other Lord's days, no fast is 
 kept on account of joy for the resurrection of Christ ; al- 
 though this is proper on that day. Formerly, indeed, some 
 Holy Fathers prehibited fasting on the Lord's day, but in 
 order to avoid the errors of heretics, suppose the Manichceans. 
 Hence it is observed, that when a vigil in which a fast is to 
 be observed, falls on a Lord's day, the fast is kept on the 
 preceding Sabbath : but yet a festival, except the Lord's day, 
 does not alter the fast, unless it is the feast of Corpus Christi, 
 or the solemnity of the Patron of the State, says Sylvius. 
 
 " Is the obligation of abstaining from eggs and milk diet 
 serious ? 
 
 " Ans. It appears so ; because in them a serious matter 
 may be afforded :. yet it is often light. Hear, prop. 32, con- 
 demned by Alexand. VII. ; * It is not evident that the custom 
 of not eating eggs and milk diet in Lent is obligatory.' 
 
 " Heretics object that there are no testimonies extant con- 
 cerning the fast of Lent in the epistles of the apostles. 
 
 " This fast has been propagated by apostolic tradition. For 
 the proof of this, that golden rule of St. Augustine, bk. 4, 
 against the Donatists, ch. xxiv., is sufficient : ' What the uni- 
 versal Church holds, and which is not appointed by Coun- 
 cils, but has always been retained, is most justly believed to 
 be handed down by nothing else than apostolic authority.' 
 
 " Whoever wishes more particularly to learn the rise, pro- 
 gress, and changes of the aforesaid fasts, let him consult the 
 work, R. P. Cozza, ' Concerning fasting.' 
 
 " Obj. Mark ii. 19, Christ says, that the sons of the 
 Bridegroom can not fast ; but Christians are the sons of the 
 Bridegroom ; therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. The saying is parabolical : by the sons of the 
 Bridegroom are meant the disciples of Christ, and it is sig- 
 nified that it is not proper thai Christ, whilst he tarried with 
 them on earth, should make them fast or mourn, as Matthew 
 expresses it, ch. ix. v. 15 ; but after the death of Christ they 
 fasted ; as Paul testifies concerning himself, 2 Cor. vi. 5, and 
 
324 OF FASTING. 
 
 xi. 27. St. Thomas offers two other replies, q. 147, art. 4, 
 ad. 5. 
 
 Concerning Abstinence from Meats. (No. 257.) 
 
 " Why is the eating of meat on a fast day forbidden ? 
 
 " Because fasting has been instituted for the mortification 
 of the flesh, or for restraining the lust of taste and concu- 
 piscence, &c. 
 
 " Under meats are included the broth of meats, and those 
 things which derive their origin from flesh, as eggs, &;c. 
 
 " The meats of the animals which are considered as for- 
 bidden, are better ascertained from common custom : the 
 flesh of turtles, frogs, and the like, which are nourislied in 
 the water, are not included, &c. 
 
 "Why is not wine forbidden, in which there is luxury? 
 Prov. XX. 
 
 " Because wine elsewhere is an ordinary and necessary 
 drink. 
 
 "St. Thomas, art. 8, ad. 1. Because wine excites lust 
 only by reason of heat, which quickly passes away ; but 
 meats promote it by reason of the humour, which remains 
 long," &c. &c. 
 
 " How great a sin is it to eat flesh on a day of fasting or 
 abstinence 1 
 
 " It is, from its very nature, a mortal sin ; because, in it 
 a serious matter is afforded, and the object of the law like- 
 wise is important ; and because the opinion of the faithful so 
 has it. 
 
 " May it become venial from the trifling amount of the 
 matter ? 
 
 " Yes : because a single mouthful of meat, v. g., is not 
 in itself an important amount of food or nourishment; nor 
 does it become serious on account of the object of the law ; 
 therefore, &c. 
 
 " Yet this eating will everywhere be a mortal sin on ac- 
 count of erroneous conscience and scandal, and on account 
 of acting against the profession of faith ; for the people 
 apprehend the eating of meat on a fast-day as a proof and 
 sign of heresy ; and for this reason Tannerus does not ad- 
 mit it as a liffht matter. 
 
OF FASTING. 325 
 
 " Observe, that any one sins just so often as he eats meat 
 on a fast-day ; for the precept of not eating meats is nega- 
 tive. 
 
 " Why does the Church iiermit only one refreshment on 
 a fast-day 1 
 
 " St. Thomas, art. 6, &c. : because, by a single refresh- 
 ment human nature is saved from perishing, and at the same 
 time something is taken away from lust. 
 
 " A natural day is meant from the twelfth hour of the 
 night to the twelfth of the following night. 
 
 "Observe 1. In what way each taking of food without 
 cause on a day of fasting, besides the refreshment and col- 
 lation, occasions sin, either mortal, if the matter be respec- 
 tively considerable, or venial, if the matter is trifling. 
 
 " Observe 2. That several small quantities taken on the 
 same fast-day coalesce among themselves by reason of the 
 effect of nutrition, and thus may constitute matter serious 
 enough for mortal sin ; just as several small thefts coalesce : 
 hence this prop. 29, was condemned by Alex. VII. ' He who 
 frequently eats a little on a fast-day, although he may in the 
 end have eaten a considerable quantity, does not break his 
 fast,"'&c. ^ 
 
 Of sins respecting the single refreshment. (No. 259.) 
 
 " Sin may be committed in a threefold way, in the case 
 of the single refreshment: 1. By taking several refresh- 
 ments, or several parts of a refreshment : 2. By dividing the 
 refreshment, or interrupting it through a considerable time : 
 3. By protracting the refreshment to too long a time : for 
 thus the refreshment is virtually multiplied. 
 
 " To how long a time may the refreshment be protracted 1 
 
 " It is said reasonably, that it may not be protracted 
 
 BEYOND TWO HOURS. Hcnno adds that then the guests 
 
 ARE TO BE ADMONISHED TO ABSTAIN FROM EATING. 
 
 " May any one, who hastily finishes his refreshment in 
 the time of half an hour, eat again after the space of one 
 hour, on the ground that the two hours of refreshment are 
 not yet elapsed? 
 
 " No ; because he is supposed in intention and fact to have 
 entirely finished his refreshment ; so that the latter eating is 
 
326 OF FASTING. 
 
 not a part of the former meal, which was finished, but is 
 rather a part of a second refreshment. 
 
 " Does he sin, who divides his meal into two parts by a 
 considerable space of time, when these two parts are equiva- 
 lent in regard to the food, to only a single entire refresh- 
 ment ] 
 
 " Yes : the reason is because the unity of the refresh- 
 ment is not preserved. Besides not only are several entire 
 meals forbidden, but also several semi-refreshments, or parts 
 of a meal. 
 
 " How great a space of time is thought in this case, to 
 make a considerable interruption ? 
 
 " According to Cozza, the space of half an hour does it ; 
 especially if there is no just reason, or if any one has ceased 
 without the intention of afterwards continuing the refresh- 
 ment he had commenced : Cozza indeed supposes, that he 
 who rises from table with no intention and desire of resuming 
 the meal, or, which is equivalent, who has said the prayer 
 of thanks with the intention of finishing the refreshment, 
 cannot resume the meal, although but a short time after; 
 yet others think, that it is proper if he has changed his mind. 
 See La Croix, lib. 3. p. 2, &c. 
 
 "For a just reason, it will be^lawful without any sin to 
 interrupt the refreshment for a short time, for a quarter or 
 half hour, says Cozza : and thus, if any one has commenc- 
 ed a meal, and is called away for a purpose of necessity or 
 business, he may on his return finish the single refreshment 
 which was commenced before. 
 
 " On the same ground Diana excuses those who wait at 
 table, and those who read during the time of the meal, who 
 take some food immediately before the meal : because these 
 persons intend to begin the refreshment with those who are 
 eating, and after performing their duty, immediately to finish 
 it, &c. 
 
 " What quantity of food taken above the refreshment and 
 the little collation, is regarded as a serious or sufficient 
 matter for mortal sin : but what quantity is a trifling matter ? 
 
 " As regards an ecclesiastical fast, it is agreed that there 
 is an amount which may be considered trifling ; and thus 
 one or two mouthsful of bread is a small matter ; or as 
 Cozza and Antoine say, one or two ounces, v. g. a cake of 
 
OF FASTING. 327 
 
 a single quarter which weighs an ounce and a half is a small 
 matter : but here I think again that there should be some 
 respective consideration. 
 
 " A man's breakfast by which he is sufficiently nourished 
 until noon, is certainly a serious matter, &c. 
 
 " Apples, pears, nuts, grapes, and other fruits, are also 
 included among articles of food ; but yet, as they are com- 
 monly rather light diet, a greater quantity is requisite in 
 order to constitute a serious matter : it follows, that it is not 
 permitted even for the purpose of allaying thirst, to eat ap- 
 ples, grapes, &c., just as it is not lawful on account of thirst 
 to drink milk, when necessity does not require it. See 
 Cozza more at length, p. 3. a. 1. dub. 5., who, in the same 
 place, num. 59, disapproves of the mode of chewing apples 
 and grapes, by which only the juice seems to be taken : 
 must, however, is regarded as simple drink." 
 
 Of the Sins of the Third and Fourth Refreshment. (260.) 
 
 " Does he, who has violated the fast by a second refresh- 
 ment, sin by taking the third and fourth on the same day ? 
 
 "-4.715. Yes: indeed he sins as often as he eats after- 
 wards, or at least increases his sin : because the ecclesiasti- 
 cal precept of the fast includes the negative : you shall not 
 take several refreshments, which equally prohibits the third 
 and second : any one sins just so often as he eats meat on a 
 fast-day. Thus, Sylvius, &c., Antoine, &;c. 
 
 "Busenbaum thinks, that this person, although he has 
 sinned mortally in the second refreshment, sins only venial ly 
 in the third and the rest : but he does not give the reason of 
 his peculiar remark : nor can a solid one be given, when the 
 quantity of the third and of the other meals is serious : as 
 Sylvius teaches with the passages cited from La Croix, lib. 
 3. p. 2. n. 1265. The opinion of Busenbaum may perhaps 
 be admitted when the quantity of the other meals is so tri- 
 fling that it does not occasion a considerable increase and 
 amount of the first transgression. 
 
 " Does he break the fast, who on the fast-day, or the day 
 before, eats more than usual in the refreshment, that he may 
 more easily sustain the burden of fasting? 
 
 " Ans. He does not seem directly to violate the precept of 
 the fast, because the quantity of food in the refreshment, ac- 
 
328 OF FASTING. 
 
 cording to S. Thon:., is not rated by the law of fasting. 
 Bonac. &c., Abul., &c., and the modern Cozza prove this 
 answer by this reason: because this person observes every- 
 thing which is commanded, the single refreshment, the hour, 
 and abstinence from meat. 
 
 " Nor is it any objection that he sins against temperance : 
 because he certainly observes the precept as to substance : 
 it is not obligatory that the fast be an act supernatural in 
 substance. 
 
 " Some, among whom is Billuart, teach that he acts con- 
 trary to the law of the fast," &c. 
 
 Divers objections are then refuted ; and at the close of his 
 answers, Peter Dens remarks : 
 
 " This, however, is readily granted, that he acts in some 
 measure against the object of the law and against temper- 
 ance, and in so far he may sin. Indeed, a repletion of this 
 kind renders fasting more onerous, when the food too much 
 oppresses the body and mind, generates bad humours and 
 phlegm, whilst a moderate refreshment recruits and fortifies 
 the body and mind." 
 
 Concerning the Hour of the Single Refreshment. 
 (No. 261.) 
 
 " At what hour of the day, in time of fasting, is it proper 
 to take refreshment ? 
 
 " According to present custom, about the twelfth hour, at 
 noon : it is permitted to wait longer, and anciently it was 
 commanded to wait until evening, afterwards till the third 
 hour, as was said above, (No. 256.) It is not lawful to an- 
 ticipate the hour, &c. 
 
 " How great a sin is it to anticipate the hour ? 
 
 " Sylvius replies, quest. 147, &c., that the anticipation of 
 half an hour is a light offence, but of two hours, it is griev- 
 ous ; because it is a considerable anticipation ; in case some 
 one should take refreshment about the ninth or tenth hour in 
 the morning • So Lessing also, &c., with some others. 
 
 " Cozza, however, is not so indulgent, for he says, that 
 to anticipate the hour of eating, appointed by custom, by one 
 hour, is a considerable time and a mortal sin. 
 
OF FASTING. 329 
 
 "The single refi-eshment may be anticipated for a just 
 cause, for instance, for the sake of beginning a journey, 
 which will not admit of a refreshment at the proper time, 
 and for similar matters and necessities. Sylvius, Cozza, 
 Regin. 
 
 " Therefore observe, how any one refreshing himself with 
 meat early on a fast-day, without cause, with the* intention 
 of taking a second refreshment, commits a threefold mortal 
 sin, or one equivalent to three. 
 
 " For which reason, he who confesses that he has broken 
 his fast, must be asked, which, or what parts of the fast he 
 has violated, whether without any just reason, whether he 
 has caused scandal, or an occasion of sin to others." 
 
 Concerning the Little Collation at evening, (No. 262.) 
 
 " The little collation at evening, which is also called the 
 little refreshment, the little supper, and the collation, anciently 
 unknown, because the refreshment was taken about evening, 
 commenced from the time at which the refreshment began to 
 be taken about noon : the name has been derived from the 
 collations or conferences and spiritual lectures in the even- 
 ing, when the faithful assembled ; where they then first took 
 a little drink; afterwards, lest this drink should be injurious 
 to an empty stomach, they took a little food ; by degrees this 
 custom increased to such an extent, that this little collation 
 is at present taken so as to afford some nourishment, the 
 church in so far relaxing her own law. No decree of the 
 church has indeed been promulgated concerning this relax- 
 ation ; but the law has been modified by custom, with the 
 connivance of the church ; and this indulgence of the church 
 we learn from the unanimous interpretation of theologians, 
 and the practice of the faithful. 
 
 " The little collation, therefore, may be described as the 
 taking of a little food, in order that drink may not injure the 
 body, and that the body may at the same time be moderately 
 refreshed. 
 
 " It is to be observed, that whilst the little collation has 
 indeed been introduced by custom, it is only in so far lawful, 
 as the legitimate custom of the scrupulous faithful approves itT 
 
 " How much food may be taken for the little collation? 
 28 
 
330 OF FASTING. 
 
 " Some have appointed a certain quantity for all, or a fix- 
 ed number of ounces of bread. S. Car. Borr. has determin- 
 ed an ounce and a half of bread, Cozza eight ounces, Con- 
 cina three or four; but, as it seems, not with sufficient pro- 
 priety ; because, what would be very little for one man, v. g., 
 a German, would be too much for another, say, an Italian : 
 therefore the constitutions of persons should be regarded, the 
 kinds of food, &c. For this reason, the quantity of the lit- 
 tle collation is more properly determined by respect and pro- 
 portion to the quantity which this person needs for a mode- 
 rate supper or refreshment ; according to this mode, Van-den 
 Bosch restricts the quantity of the little collation to the sev- 
 enth or sixth part of a refreshment : Layman, Filliuc, Bu- 
 senbaum and others extend it to the fifth or fourth part of a 
 whole supper; and none are found, even the most liberal, 
 who indulge regularly beyond the fourth part of an entire 
 refreshment. Therefore, according to this more liberal com- 
 putation, if I need for a meal sixteen ounces of food, I may 
 take four ounces of bread for a collation. 
 
 " The custom has prevailed in monasteries that a cake of 
 two quarters is distributed to each one at the collation, al- 
 though all do not eat it up. 
 
 " May he who has been sufficiently strengthened by the 
 refreshment of dinner, or who is not hungry in the evening, 
 take the little evening collation ? 
 
 " Cozza replies affirmatively, on account of custom ; and 
 on account of continual anxieties which will occur, says Azo- 
 rius. 
 
 " What kinds of food is it lawful to take in the little col- 
 lation ? 
 
 "The custom from which the little collation has its origin 
 teaches this ; therefore it is permitted to take fruits, herbs, 
 br»ad, or cake ; bread and butter, with cheese in this coun- 
 try, says Sylvius ; and he teaches that it is not lawful to take 
 fish, and therefore still less eggs, because they are solid food, 
 and proper for a perfect meal ; the moderns, Antoine, Coz- 
 za, Concina follow Sylvius. 
 
 " Diana, although the prince of the liberals, earnestly de- 
 fends the aforesaid opinion of Sylvius, and adduces in its 
 favour an army of doctors. 
 
 " It is indeed true, that in this country, the custom of many 
 
OF FASTING. 331 
 
 prevails that they take a little fish, with the bread and butter ; 
 but whether this habit shall prescribe to the law, would be 
 a matter for inquiry : certainly, this custom has not yet in- 
 vaded the refectories of the religious, or of monks, nor even 
 every table of all the scrupulous : but because it is a small 
 quantity in food not forbidden on that day, it is little cared 
 for, and thus is used by many. 
 
 " For the same reason, hot articles of food which have 
 been boiled are not permitted : therefore, the furnishing of 
 the table with food of different kinds, and hot meats for the 
 little collation, is an abuse, nor is it either the practice of 
 the scrupulous, nor is it custom. 
 
 " May not any one, therefore, who has been in the habit 
 of taking a cake and drinking a pint of ale, mix them, and 
 boil a little broth from them, and take it in the same quantity 
 as a little collation 1 
 
 " No ; because the form of the collation or the quality of 
 the food is not observed ; for such a boiled mess is the ordi- 
 nary food of a meal (the same rule seems to hold good in 
 relation to minced meats) ; but for the little collation custom 
 permits only cold things, which are usually taken out of the 
 refreshment ; for hot articles of food that have been boiled 
 are more pleasant, and more nutritious. — La Croix, An- 
 toine, &c. 
 
 " Some, however, consent in so far that if the quantity of 
 the collation does not exceed (this a'mount,) he does not sin 
 mortally : because, they say, the collation respects more the 
 quantity than the quality of the food. — Wiggers, Bonac, &c. 
 
 " In this country, certainly, the common opinion of all 
 regards the obligation of observing the quality of the food in 
 the collation as not serious ; whilst indeed the usual or not 
 forbidden articles of food are taken in the small quantity of 
 the collation." 
 
 Concerning the time of talcing' the Little Collation. 
 (No. 263.) 
 
 The proper' time is about evening. Though it is not law- 
 ful to invert the order of the meals on a fast day, so as to 
 take the collation at noon, and the regular refreshment in the 
 evening, yet it is not a mortal sin, because the quantity and 
 quality of the food, and the times are observed. It is no sin 
 
332 OF FASTING. 
 
 at all, if there is suflicient reason for it, v. g., if it is done on 
 account of a journey, or of attending to business at noon, 
 say on a market day. Also, if any one should be unable 
 to sleep at night, unless he has a refreshment in the evening, 
 he may then take a regular supper and a collation at noon, 
 but not two full meals. To take the collation early in the 
 morning is not orthodox, because it is anticipating the ap- 
 pointed hour. In case any one on a fast day, whether 
 through ignorance or not, should take a breakfast equivalent 
 to a full meal, he must restrict himself to the little collation ; 
 but if the breakfast was equivalent only to a collation, he 
 may take a full meal in the evening, or even at noon, if 
 some reason requires it. If the breakfast was equivalent to 
 only half a meal, he must confine himself to the collation ; 
 unless, perchance, this unwonted abstinence should occasion 
 too much inconvenience or weakness. These things are 
 conformable to the doctrine of Sylvius, Billuart, &c. 
 
 " The insane distinction of certain casuists, by which they 
 liberate him from the observance of the fast who has mali- 
 ciously violated it, but not him who has done it without any 
 fault, and altogether inadvertently, merits indignation ; for if 
 the ulterior observance is useful and reasonable for one, it 
 will be also for another. Oh, blindness in morality !" 
 
 " If any one after dinner, before the time of the collation, 
 takes some food, he sins ; but let him abstain from the colla- 
 tion : but if he takes only a little something, La Croix con- 
 cedes that he may take a collation so much less in the even- 
 ing. 
 
 " A little excess in the collation can be only a venial fault." 
 
 Much has been said about the abstemiousness enjoined 
 upon the faithful, but it is no very serious matter after all. 
 A dinner, which may lawfully be protracted for two hours, 
 is certainly sufficient for a stomach of ordinary capacity, 
 even if there were no additional license of a " little supper." 
 Besides, the pious man may gorge himself on the previous 
 day, so as to fortify himself against the siege of the first 
 half of the fast day ; and it is not likely that he will bo 
 famished, when he has two full hours by the watch in which 
 to make amends for his painful abstinence. There is not 
 
OF FASTING. 333 
 
 much danger that either priests or laymen will injure their 
 health by abstemiousness, if ihey follow the rules prescribed 
 by Doctor Dens. Now, we are not finding fault ; — we cer- 
 tainly commend them all for their good sense in this particu- 
 lar ; only we think they have rather a roundabout way of 
 getting at the thing. They might take their tea without all 
 this stratagem. We suspect the truth of the matter is, that 
 fasting does not agree with their reverences ; and that there 
 is no sensitive plant so perfect a "noli me tangere," as a 
 holy priest's stomach. 
 
 One or two more highly important sections on fasting, and 
 we will vary the subject. 
 
 Concerning the taking of Chocolate. (No. 265.) 
 
 " Does the taking of chocolate break an ecclesiastical fast 1 
 
 " It is certain, with the consent of all, that to eat choco- 
 late undiluted breaks the fast ; because it is food, and is taken 
 by way of food. 
 
 "The question is concerning the drinking of chocolate ; 
 to wit, when chocolate, mixed with water and diluted and 
 boiled, is drunk, or rather, is sucked. 
 
 " Cozza and La Croix propose this as a question contro- 
 verted by their patrons on both sides, whom they cite. 
 
 "Benedict XIV., the Supreme Pontiff, has published a 
 lucid dissertation upon this question, who, however, resolves 
 that it is more safe to abstain from chocolate on a fast day ; 
 and to him we adhere with Billuart. 
 
 " The reason is, because such a potion in itself, and more 
 especially serves for nourishment, and not properly for cool- 
 ing, or for quenching thirst ; for it is a kind of hot concoc- 
 tion. This is confirmed from the fact that by this potion 
 weak persons are nourished, &c. 
 
 ^^Obj.L A drink or a liquid does not break a fast ; 
 therefore, &c. , 
 
 " Ans. The drinking of chocolate is not a mere drink, 
 according to what has been said above. 
 
 " Observe that this axiom, ' a liquid does not break the 
 fast,' is not universally true ; for milk, honey, and similar 
 liquid things when taken break the fast. 
 28* 
 
334 OF FASTING. 
 
 " Ohj. II. A single ounce of chocolate, as it is ordinarily 
 taken, affords very little nourishment. 
 
 " Ans^ We do not dispute that the smallness of the matter 
 may excuse from mortal sin : for this reason, Cozza, al- 
 though a patron of the opposite opinion, cautions that the 
 drink of chocolate be not taken oftener than once on a fast- 
 day. 
 
 " Finally, Antonius de Leone, in Cozza, says that choco- 
 late is very nutritious. 
 
 ** Obj. III. Strong beer is also a concoction from water 
 and the flour of grain : but this drink does not break the 
 fast : therefore, neither a concoction of chocolate. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the assertion : for beer is only an extract 
 from grain : for in clarified ale, there is no gross matter of 
 the grain, but only the spirit of the grain : and hence, it is 
 a mere drink, which by accident nourishes but little ; which 
 is plain from the fact that they who drink freely without food 
 injure their constitution. Indeed, he who makes this objec- 
 tion does not understand the art of brewing ; gruel is con- 
 cocted of meal and a liquid, but not beer. 
 
 " Obj. IV. At Rome, under the eyes of the Supreme Pon- 
 tiff, the use of chocolate is permitted ; therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. A learned man has told me that when he was 
 himself at Rome, he made diligent inquiry concerning this 
 practice: and he has assured me, that there, some use it, 
 but others do not. 
 
 " The Supreme Pontiffs perhaps permit it for just reasons ; 
 perhaps in due course of time they will forbid it : and in 
 this way the custom obtained at Rome, and almost every- 
 where, that when a dispensation was given for eating meat 
 in Lent, they mixed the eating of fish in the refreshment 
 with the eating of meat ; and yet the Supreme Pontiff, Bene- 
 dict XIV., declared, that this custom was and always had been 
 an abuse. 
 
 " Hence, Concina lays down this rule : a probable opinion 
 permitted and tolerated by the Pope is not considered im- 
 plicitly approved : for many propositions have been con- 
 demned only after a long time : so too, the husbandman has 
 permitted tares to grow." 
 
OF FASTING. 335 
 
 Of Causes which excuse from Fasting. (No. 2G6.) 
 
 " These three or four causes are usually assigned : 
 
 " 1. Inability, v. g., bodily infirmity. 2. Necessity, as heavy 
 labour. 3. Piety, or a greater good, such as troublesome 
 waiting on a sick person, performed without sleep. 4. The 
 dispensation of a superior. Some reduce all these causes to 
 one, inability or impossibility. 
 
 " It is to be well observed, that as fasting contains three 
 parts, some causes Tnay excuse from the observance of one 
 part, yet not from the observance of the other parts ; v. g., 
 one who has a dispensation to eat meat, may not, therefore, 
 take several refreshments, or anticipate the hour ; thus the 
 cause of labour which permits several refreshments, does 
 not permit the eating of meat ; likewise, some reason for an- 
 ticipating the hour does not permit the eating of meat, nor 
 always several refreshments, &c. 
 
 " Observe, moreover, that the cause ought to be reasonable 
 and proportionate: so that a greater cause be required for 
 the eating of meat, than for the anticipation of the refresh- 
 ment. 
 
 " Politeness does not excuse from fasting in order that you 
 may eat with a friend. 
 
 *' The multiplicity of excuses from fasting, which casuists 
 and probabilists fabricate, so that there is scarcely a man 
 living, who may not apply some one to himself, merits in- 
 dignation rather than theological refutation. For Concina 
 on fasting, quotes from Hurtadus, how Pasqualigus enume- 
 rates about fifty conditions or orders of men, whom he de- 
 clares to be free from the command of fasting. 
 
 " Who then are held under obligation by the ecclesiastical 
 law of fasting? 
 
 " All baptized persons who have attained to the use of 
 reason, unless they should be excused from some claim, or 
 be free from the whole or from a part. 
 
 " Heretics also ? 
 
 *' Ans. Yes, if they are baptized ; because they are 
 SUBJECT TO THE Church, which docs not seem to relax her 
 law in their favour. 
 
 " Unbaptized infidels are not under obligation, because they 
 are not subject to the Church." 
 
330 OF FASTING. 
 
 The following sections on this subject, treat of particular 
 cases, when the excuse from fasting is valid, and when the 
 contrary. 
 
 A journey undertaken from a proper motive, not for the 
 purpose of eluding the precept of the Church, excuses from 
 the single refreshment and from the hour, but not from ab- 
 stinence from meat. The journey must be not a mere ex- 
 cursion of pleasure — riding on horseback, or in a carriage, 
 does not ordinarily excuse from fasting — but when the jour- 
 ney is laborious, difficult, and very fatiguing, especially for 
 one who is not used to ride on horseback, then he is not 
 obliged to fast. Pedestrians need not fast. 
 
 The age at which the obligation of the ecclesiastical fast 
 begins, is fixed at about seven : but parents, who deprive 
 their children of meat at an earlier age, in order that they 
 may from infancy learn to be subject to the rulers of the 
 Church, are commended. 
 
 "The perfect ecclesiastical fast, according to the three 
 parts explained above. No. 255, obliges those who have com- 
 pleted their twenty-first year. 
 
 " Observe 1 : that young men of this kind, before the 
 age of twenty-one, may be obliged, by the natural law, to 
 some fasts, as proper and ordinary means against the lusts 
 and sins of the flesh : hence, the custom of the pious ob- 
 serves that, at the discretion of the confessor, they assume 
 certain fasts in Lent. 
 
 " Observe 2 : that this junior age does not excuse from a fast 
 that is due from some other cause, v. g., from a vow, or 
 from some sacramental satisfaction which has been imposed, 
 or for enjoying a jubilee, &c." (No. 270) 
 
 No age has been fixed at which the law of ecclesiastical 
 fasting ceases to be obligatory : but when people are believed 
 to be so infirm or weak as to be disqualified from fasting, 
 they are excused. 
 
 Pregnant and nursing women aie excused from fasting, 
 but are not at liberty to eat meat on a fast day. 
 
 Beggars may eat whenever they have a chance, provided 
 they cannot procure enough at once to make a full meal ; 
 but if they can, they are not excused from fasting, unless 
 the dry bread and vegetables, which they have, should not 
 sufficiently recruit them when debilitated by hunger. 
 
OF FASTING. 337 
 
 Works of mercy, corporeal and spiritual, which are 
 incompatible with fasting, absolve from the obligation 
 (No. 271*.) 
 
 The power of granting a dispensation from the ecclesias 
 tical law of fasting, belongs primarily to the Pope ; but 
 bishops, regular superiors, abbots, priors, but neither the sub 
 prior, nor th*e lady abbess, says Cozza, if the prior is pre 
 sent, may afford dispensation. 
 
 It is customary for parish priests to grant this license 
 at least when the Bishop is not present. Confessors or phy 
 sicians have no such authority ; they can only declare that a 
 just cause subsists. 
 
 " May those who have a dispensation to eat meat on the 
 same day eat fish also ?" 
 
 This weighty question is controverted. On the one hand, 
 Sylvius says, that, regarding the nature of the thing, they 
 may ; but Pope Benedict XIV., the erudite author of the 
 brilliant treatise on the lawfulness of drinking chocolate on a 
 fast day, says that it is not lawful to eat fish and meat at 
 the same feast, when a dispensation has been granted only 
 with reference to meat ; and his Holiness in divers Briefs 
 has laid down the following conclusions in this momentous 
 question, equalled only by the awful controversy, which con- 
 vulsed the Lilliputian empire in the days of Gulliver, when 
 the Emperor and Nobles were divided on the question of the 
 orthodox mode of breaking eggs. 
 
 " 1. One who has a dispensation to eat meat on a day of 
 fasting, may not at the same feasts eat meat and fish ; and 
 this under grievous sin, not even on Lord's days in Lent. 
 Put oysters and crabs, even. delicate ones, under the same 
 rule with fish, to which add shell-fish. 
 
 " 2. Neither may he eat meat in the evening collation, 
 riot even in that small quantity which is allowed in other 
 food. 
 
 " 3. Neither may this dispensed person on this account 
 anticipate the hour nor take several meals, &c. 
 
 " 4. One who has a dispensation to eat eggs, may also 
 eat fish. 
 
 " By these aforesaid rules they are not bound, who are 
 grievously sick or disqualified by a similar necessity," &c., 
 &c., No. 273. 
 
338 OF FASTING. 
 
 No. 275, treats of the sins of others in the cause of fast- 
 ing. 
 
 It is not proper to give food on a fast-day to a person, if 
 you know that he will violate the fast; you may not offer 
 such a one a breakfast or a supper. In the same way, it 
 follows that tavern-keepers may not, in a Catholic country, 
 offer meat to heretics on a forbidden day ; and if they ask 
 for it, they are to be told that the laws of the country forbid 
 it, and that as they are bound to obey the other laws of the 
 land, they must obey the law concerning fasting too. But 
 in case of war, when the armies of the heretics occupy the 
 country, then the laws of the church yield to fear and 
 necessity ; so too when the country is ruled by heretics. 
 Reginald excuses servants who prepare forbidden dishes for 
 their masters, on a fast-day, because they do it in obedience 
 to orders, but Peter Dens advises them In this case to leave 
 such families and seek employment elsewhere, unless other 
 just reasons should be in the way. 
 
 The following question and answer closes the chapter on 
 fasting : 
 
 " What is to be done, when you see any one through 
 ignorance or inadvertence eating something on a fast-day, 
 contrary to the precept of the fast ? 
 
 " You are bound by a debt of legal justice to remind him 
 of his obligation, or to hinder him, &;c. 
 
 "Sylvius wishes to excuse from mortal sin, those who, 
 by an imaginary claim, suppose themselves to be excused 
 from fasting, when gross ignorance does not concur: but 
 La Croix is more rigid in this case." 
 
 One of the marks by which Paul designates the great 
 apostasy, which was to afflict the church in the latter times, 
 is ABSTINENCE FROM MEATS. Be it remembered, the apos- 
 tle does not condemn fasting, nor does he say that fasting 
 would be a peculiarity of the man of sin. It certainly is 
 abundantly evident from the doctrines inculcated in the 
 above sections that a fast in the Romish Church is a perfect 
 farce ; on the most solemn day of ecclesiastical fasting, the 
 faithful have full license to eat one hearty meal, which may 
 be protracted to the length of two hours ; and they, who 
 
OF FASTING. 339 
 
 cannot appease the cravings of hunger in that time must 
 certainly be tormented with ravenous appetites ! Besides 
 this, they may have a " little supper," so that there is very 
 little danger that the "good Catholic''' will spend a sleepless 
 night, on account of the gnawings of hunger ! But, whilst 
 it is only a venial sin if he offends against Temperance on 
 a fast-day, by glutting himself with lawful food, if he eats 
 MEAT on that day, he commits mortal sin ; i. e. an offence, 
 which entails damnation upon his soul, unless confession be 
 made, penance duly performed, and absolution from a Holy 
 Priest received ! So exactly does the mark of the beast, 
 ABSTINENCE " FROM MEATS, designate the Church of Rome 
 as the Man of Sin. It is not an uncommon thing, for Pa- 
 pists to endeavour to raise a smile at the application of such 
 terms as the above to Holy Mother ; but where will they 
 find another to answer the description which the Bible gives 1 
 Observe, this apostasy is to grow out of the Church of 
 Christ ; it is to be literally an apostasy ; where then we 
 ask again, can another church professing to be Christian, be 
 found, that shall answer this description of the Apostle, 
 " forbidding to marry and commanding to abstain from 
 
 MEATS J 
 
 7" 
 
 The remainder of Vol. IV., treats of sins of licentious- 
 ness. It would not be decent to translate even the least 
 offensive of these chapters. The most outrageous forms of 
 bestiality which it is possible for iniquity to assume are 
 gravely discussed, and held up with most revolting particu- 
 larity before students of divinity, who are under a vow of 
 chastity and perpetual celibacy. The filthiness of this slimy 
 
340 DE POLLUTIONS. 
 
 puddle of Romish casuistry is so offensive, that I must be 
 excused from stirring the scum ; I cannot permit its effluvia 
 even from a distance to annoy the mental olfactories of my 
 reader by a translation, but in order to furnish evidence of 
 the vileness of this theology I I will present a few extracts 
 from the original Latin. 
 
 De modo contra naturam. (No. 295.) 
 
 " I. Quinta species luxuries contra naturam committitur 
 quando qnidem copula masculi Jit in vase femincB natu- 
 rally sed indebito modo, v. g. stando, aut dum vir succum- 
 bit, vel a retro feminam cognoscit, sicut equi congrediuntur, 
 quamvis in vase femineo. 
 
 " 11. Possunt autem hi modi inducere peccatum mortale 
 juxta periculum perdendi semen, eo quod scilicet semen viri 
 communiter non possit apte effundi usque in matricem 
 feminse. 
 
 " III. Et quamvis forte conjuges dicant quod periculum 
 diligenter prsecaveant, illi interim lascivi modi a gravi 
 veniali excusari non debent, nisi forte propter impotentiam, 
 V. g. ob curvitatem uxoris, nequeat servari naturalis situs et 
 modus, qui est ut mulier succumbat viro." 
 
 De Pollutione. (No. 296.) 
 
 ^ tP -tC* T?* *??■ vf- 
 
 " Quid agere debet is, qui sub pollutione in somno in- 
 ch oata evigilat ? 
 
 " Evigilans non potest ei ullum consensum prtebere, sed 
 potius dissensum seu displicentiam voluntatis formare debet. 
 
 " An tenetur illam pollutionem in somno inceptam, mox 
 ut evigilat, vi cohibere, suumque corpus comprimere, ne 
 continuetur in vigilia ? 
 
 " R. cum Antoine : tenetur, saltem ut pollutio non conti- 
 nuetur per effusionem seminis necdum e lumbis vel ex testi- 
 culis extravasati. Sanchez, Billuart, aliique videntur per- 
 mittere continuationem ob periculum infirmitatis ; sed 
 omnino puto, eos id dicere solummodo de semine jam extra- 
 vasato, nimirum ut exterius effluat : alioquin non licet pro- 
 movere formalem pollutionem, nequidrm id evadendam 
 mortem. 
 
DE BESTIALITATE. 341 
 
 " Notat Neesen difTicilem esse correctionem eorum, qui 
 dediti sunt huic vitio pollutiones." 
 
 .The atrocity of these and similar passages can be appre- 
 ciated only, when we bear in mind that the most revolting 
 questions concerning these subjects are put to penitents of 
 every age and sex at the confessional, whenever the Priest 
 deems it expedient. 
 
 "Confessarius prudens omnem evadet invidiam hac 
 methodo : dum puella confitetur se esse fornicatam, confes- 
 sarius petat, an prima vice, qua simile peccatum commisit, 
 exposuerit circumstantiam amissse virginitatis. 
 
 " Si respondeat categorice, ita, vel non, cessat difficultas ; 
 et quidem si jam sint primae vices statim reponet, jam fuisse 
 primas vices, adeoque solum ei dici debet, ut conteratur de 
 ilia circumstantia, et earn confiteatur : si taceat, instruatur, 
 illam circumstantiam tutiijs semel exprimendam, adeoque si 
 id nunquam fecerit, jam desuper doleat et se accuset," (No. 
 287.) 
 
 In No. 293, De Bestialitate, the following passage occurs ; 
 
 "Ad hoc crimen reducitur congressus carnalis cum 
 dsemone in corpore assumpto : quod scelus aggravatur per 
 circumstantiam contra religionem, quatenus includit socie- 
 tatem cum dsemone; ideoque gravis est et gravissimum 
 peccatum contra naturam : consideranda est etiam forma 
 corporis vel hominis, vel bestise, in qua apparet daemon ; 
 item repr-cEsentatio persona) virgin is, monialis, &c. Veriim 
 plerumque* prcesumendiim est, talia solum fieri per fortem 
 imaginationem, qua decipiuntur homines," &c. 
 
 29 
 
342 WORSHIP AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIII. 
 
 Vol. V. commences with a Treatise on the Incarnation of 
 Christ. The 24th No. treats 
 
 Op the Worship and Invocation of the Saints. 
 
 " Prove that the Saints in heaven are to be worshipped 
 and honoured with the veneration of dulia. 
 
 " Ans. It is proved from this that they have supernatural 
 excellence and are the friends of God : and therefore a rea- 
 son for their worship truly subsists. 
 
 "The same is proved from this that the church has insti- 
 tuted festivals of the Saints ; and therefore, the worship 
 of the Saints may be said to be a commanded duty. 
 
 " Finally, it is proved from the Old Testament ; for Abra- 
 ham, Jacob, Samson, and others, exhibited reverence or 
 honour to angels : therefore, as men are blessed as the angels 
 of God, (as is said. Matt. xxii. v. 30.), it follows also, that 
 their worship is lawful. 
 
 ** Is this worship of the Saints absolute or respective? 
 
 " It is absolute : because it is exhibited on account of the 
 excellence, intrinsic, and peculiar to themselves : yet it may 
 also be called respective, inasmuch as God is honoured in 
 the Saints. 
 
 " Ohj. I. 1 Tim. i. 17, it is said, to the only God he 
 honour and glory, therefore, not to the Saints. 
 
 ^^Ans. The worship of latria not of dulia is spoken of 
 in the text ; otherwise, the apostle would contradict himself, 
 writing to the Romans ; ii. v. 10 ; hut glory and honour to 
 every one that worketh good. 
 
 " Ohj. II. MardochsBus, Esther xiii. 14., gives as a rea- 
 son why he would not rise up before Aman : I feared lest 
 I might transfer the honour of my God to a man ; there- 
 fore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. Aman had required honour as though he were in 
 himself somewhat of a divinity : for when the Gentiles were 
 promoted, they supposed that divinity was communicated to 
 themselves ; and thus we see that the Caesars after their 
 death were reckoned among the number of the gods. 
 
WORSHIP AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 343 
 
 " ObJ. III. Apoc. xix. 10. The angel refused to be wor- 
 shipped by John, saying, See thou do it not; therefore, 
 &c. 
 
 "A/15. The angel refused this on account of the 
 
 GREAT HOLINESS OF JoHN. 
 
 " Are the Saints to be invoked by us 1 
 
 " I answer, with Council of Trent, sess. 25. Concerning 
 the Invocation of the Saints : * that it is good and useful to 
 supplicate them, and to fly to their prayers, power, and aid : 
 but that they who deny that the Saints are to be invoked, 
 or who assert that they do not pray for men, or that their 
 invocation of them is idolatry, hold an impious opinion.' 
 
 " It is proved also from Gen. xlviii. 16., where Jacob in- 
 vokes his own angel : besides that angels have conferred 
 many benefits is plain from various passages, and especially 
 from the history of Tobias : but there is the same reason for 
 the invocation of beatified men as of angels : and thus, also, 
 2 Mace. XV. 14., it is plain that the Saints which are still in 
 limbus pray for men : for it is there said concerning Jere- 
 miah : this is he that prayeth much for the people : final- 
 ly, according to sectarians themselves, it is proper to call 
 upon Saints whilst they are still upon earth to pray for us, 
 (thus God, Exod. xxxii. 14., was appeased by the prayer of 
 Moses for the people) ; therefore, it is more proper to pray 
 to the Saints who are reigning with Christ, as to those who 
 are more closely connected with God in heaven." 
 
 The objections against the Invocation of Saints are solved, 
 (No. 25.) 
 
 " Obf. I. 1 Tim. ch. ii. 5., it is said : one mediator of 
 God and men, the man Christ Jesus; therefore the Saints 
 are not our mediators. 
 
 " Ans. I make a distinction in the inference : I entirely 
 agree, that, therefore, the Saints are not the principal media- 
 tors ; for Christ alone is the one who asks in his own name, 
 as he who by his own proper merit renders God propitious 
 to men : I deny the inference, that, therefore, the Saints are 
 not secondary mediators, and participatively, who relying 
 on the merits of Christ beseech God for us ; and thus, in- 
 deed, Gal. iii. 19., the name of mediator is given to Moses, 
 and in this sense, also, the Divine Virgin is called our life 
 
344 WORSHIP AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 
 
 and hope : but when we ask of her, give salvation to thy 
 servants, it is meant that she give it by obtaining it ; and 
 thus, the apostle, 1 Cor. ix. 22. ventures to say of himself: 
 that I might save all. 
 
 " Nor does this diminish the dignity and power of Christ : 
 because the Saints are invoked as mediators with the media- 
 tor and God, says St. Thomas : so that they themselves by 
 their intercession may supply that which is wanting to the 
 weakness of our prayers. 
 
 " Ohj. II. The Saints have no knowledge of our pray- 
 ers ; therefore, they are invoked in vain. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the antecedent : because the Saints know 
 all things which pertain to their state in the Word ; and, 
 therefore, they see our prayers directed to themselves in the 
 Word or in God, as in a mirror containing all things, just as 
 the angels have knowledge of our prayers. 
 
 " You may urge ; Eccl. ix. 5., it is said, the dead know 
 nothing more; therefore, the Saints do not know our 
 prayers. 
 
 "The best solution is that these are the words op 
 
 THE foolish and OF THOSE WHO SAY THAT THE SOUL 
 PERISHES WITH THE BODY.* 
 
 " Ohj, III. All benefits come forth from God to us, who 
 IS prepared to give them ; therefore we ask these things of 
 the Saints improperly. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : because we do not ask any- 
 thing of the Saints in excluding God, but rather that through 
 the Saints, as through intercessors, we may receive them 
 from God. 
 
 " But that we implore the clemency of God through the 
 Saints, is not through the defect of the power or mercy of 
 God : but because God is willing to grant certain blessings 
 only through the Saints : that thus the Saints may be hon- 
 oured and God in them ; or, also, that thus subordination 
 and order in second causes may be preserved, says St. 
 Thomas. 
 
 " Generally as to. these and other objections you will con- 
 vince sectarians that all these things do not hinder us from 
 
 * Not a word is said in the context, which affords the least ground 
 for such a supposition. My reader can refer to the passage. 
 
WORSHIP AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 345 
 
 imploring the prayers of the living : therefore, neither can 
 they be any objection to our seeking the suffrages of the 
 Saints in heaven. 
 
 " Is the invocation of the Saints a commanded duty ? 
 
 " Some reply that it is neither necessary to salvation, nor 
 is it enjoined upon every one : yet Sylvius, Billuart, &c., 
 think more probably that it is a commanded duty : concern- 
 ing the Blessed Virgin, at least this seems to be sufficiently 
 inferred from the Holy Fathers and the common opinion of 
 the faithful." 
 
 Concerning the Worship of Images. (No. 26.) 
 
 " What is meant by an image ? 
 
 " A similitude or representation of some existing things 
 expressed for that thing as a copy : for it is called an 
 image from imitating ; because it represents the thing which 
 it imitates. 
 
 " How does it differ from an idol ? 
 
 " Because an idol is a likeness representing that, which 
 either simply does not exist, or certainly is not such as that 
 which is worshipped : but an image is the similitude of a 
 thing which really exists, v. g. of a man : hence the apostle 
 says concerning an idol, 1 Cor. viii. 4 ; because we hiow 
 that an idol is nothing in the world ; nothing certainly in 
 its representation : because it is no divinity in itself or in its 
 own prototype. 
 
 " Prove that the images of Christ and the Saints are to be 
 worshipped. 
 
 " Ans. It is PROVED in the first place from the Council 
 OF Trent, (I !)sess. above cited, where it will say against 
 sectarians, * that the images of Christ and of the Virgin 
 Mother of God and of the other Saints, are to be kept and 
 retained especially in temples, and that due honour and 
 veneration are to be paid to them.' 
 
 " The Seventh general Synod or the II. Nicene, under 
 Adrian I., had decreed the same against the Iconoclast here- 
 tics, saying, that salutation and honorary adoration were to 
 be exhibited to the images of Christ and the Saints. 
 
 " It is proved further : because proper veneration was due 
 and was given to the ark of the covenant in the old law; 
 because it bore the image of heavenly things ; although the 
 29* 
 
34G WORSHIP AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 
 
 ark in itself was something inanimate and destitute of in- 
 trinsic holiness: hence, concerning it, it is said literally, 
 Ps. xcviii. 5., adore his footstool, for it is holy ; therefore, 
 &c. 
 
 " Finally, it is proved also from reason : because the 
 honour of an image in itself redounds to the prototype ; just 
 as on the contrary, an insult offered to a royal statue re- 
 dounds to the king, as S. Amb. remarks, Serm. x. on Ps. 
 cxviii. 
 
 "Are images op God and of the Most Holy 
 Trinity proper? 
 
 " Yes : although this is not so certain as concerning the 
 images of Christ and the Saints ; as this was determined at 
 a later period, 
 
 " But it is to be observed that the divinity cannot be de- 
 picted, but those forms are depicted under which God has 
 sometimes appeared, or to which divine attributes are paid 
 in some similitude : thus God the Father is represented 
 under the form of an old man : because Dan. vii. 9. we read 
 that he appeared thus : and the ancient of days sat ; and 
 the Holy Ghost under the form of a dove ; because he ap- 
 peared thus, Matt. iii. 16 : He saw the Spirit of God de- 
 scending like a dove ; or under the form of cloven tongues, 
 such as he appeared on the day of Pentecost, Acts ii. 3. 
 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues as it were of 
 fire. 
 
 " Therefore, images of this kind are not to be painted 
 according to any one's will, but only under these forms in 
 which they have sometimes appeared. 
 
 " It is proved by an equal reason : for just as it is proper 
 to describe these histories and apparitions with words, thus 
 also with colours : for pictures as well as words are signs of 
 things. 
 
 " With this also agrees the condemnation of prop. 26, by 
 Alexander VIII., A. D. 1690 : ' It is a sin to place a likeness 
 of God the Father in a Christian temple.' 
 
 " Obj. Exod. XX. 4., God commanded : thou shalt not 
 make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any- 
 thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath; 
 therefore God himself has forbidden images. 
 
 *' Ans. 1. Some who think that under the old law it was for- 
 
WORSHIP AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 347 
 
 bidden to make images on account of the proneness of the 
 Jews to idolatry, say that this precept is partly moral, inas- 
 much as it forbids idolatry ; partly ceremonial in so far as it 
 forbids every image : and in this respect it ceases in the new 
 law so much the more, because its cause now no longdr 
 exists. 
 
 " Ans. 2. That idols are only forbidden to be made such 
 as the Gentiles made, to which they paid divine honour; 
 hence it is added: that thou may est adore them; viz., as 
 gods. 
 
 " But that all images are not forbidden is plain from the 
 fact that by the command of God the images of two Cheru- 
 bim were made about the ark. 
 
 " Finally, you will generally confound heretics from 
 NATURAL REASON, which dictates that it is proper to make 
 pictures of parents, kings, &c., and to honour them with 
 civil worship ; therefore, much more is it right to make and 
 to honour the images of the Saints." 
 
 N. B. When heretics make pictures of kings and presi- 
 dents and parents to bow down before them, and pay them 
 the worship of dulia, they will deserve to be confounded ; 
 according to the Scripture, " confounded be all they that 
 serve graven images !" 
 
 Of the quality of the worship of Images. (No. 27.) 
 
 " With what worship are the images of Christ and the 
 Saints to be worshipped 1 
 
 " It is to be premised with St. Thom. in corp. that images 
 may be regarded in a twofold manner. 
 
 " I. In so far as they are anything or certain matter, say 
 gold or sculptured or painted wood ; and in this respect they 
 cannot be honoured. 
 
 " IT. In so much as they are images or representations of 
 Christ or the Saints : and in this respect they may be hon- 
 oured with relative or respective worship ; so doubtless that 
 they may not be honoured for the sake of a dignity intrinsic 
 in themselves, but on account of the dignity of the prototype 
 or pattern : and consequently the honour shown to an image 
 redounds to the prototype as to the formal reason of the 
 
348 WORSHIP AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 
 
 worship ; although the object which the representing image 
 itself is, is not the reason why it is worshipped. 
 
 " III. Therefore, St. Thomas replies to the question, that 
 images may be honoured with the same worship, with which 
 their prototype is honoured, but only with a relative or re- 
 spective worship : therefore, the images of the Saints are 
 worshipped with the respective veneration of dulia ; of the 
 Divine Virgin with the relative worship of hyperdulia ; of 
 Christ and of God with the respective worship of latria : 
 almost just as if by the same virtue we love God and our 
 neighbour on account of the goodness of God in himself. 
 
 " Many, however, maintain that this respective worship 
 paid to images ought to be less than the worship shown to 
 the prototype itself: and hence they infer that the worship 
 of latria is due to no image. They rely upon the Seventh 
 Synod, which says that latria is not to be shown to images, 
 because it belongs only to the divine nature. 
 
 " But others explain the Seventh Synod concerning abso- 
 lute latria, which is not due to the images of Christ, although 
 the respective worship of latria is due to them ; and, there- 
 fore, they may be adored with less honour than the proto- 
 type ; which are not repugnant to one another. 
 
 " However this may be, it is sufficient for us against sec- 
 tarians, that all Catholics teach and prove that the images 
 of the Saints are to be worshipped. 
 
 *' ObJ. It seems superstitious to worship and distinguish 
 certain images as though miraculous. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the antecedent, with St. Aug. Epist. cxxxvii. : 
 for this distinction is to be sought from the crratuitous will of 
 God whom it pleases to confer special benefits upon persons 
 who worship one image rather than another ; just as God 
 restored those to health, who looked at the brazen Serpent 
 erected by Moses, (Num. xxi. 9.) not so to those who look- 
 ed at any other : Christ restored sight to the man who had 
 been born blind, when he washed himself in the pool of 
 Siloam, John ix. 7., and Naaman the Syrian was cleansed 
 from leprosy in the Jordan, 4 Kgs. v. 10., rather than else- 
 where. 
 
 " In the same way, a solution is given when the objection 
 is made against the invocation of Saints, that it is supersti- 
 
WORSHIP AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 349 
 
 tious to invoke one Saint for such a disease, another for 
 another. 
 
 " However, the Council of Trent, sess. xxv. admonishes 
 concerning the invocation of the Saints, that the faithful be 
 instructed that they do not believe that there is any inherent 
 divinity or virtue in images, on account of which they are 
 to be worshipped, or anything to be asked of them, or con- 
 fidence to be placed in them, as was formerly done by the 
 Gentiles. Besides, it admonishes that all superstition and 
 filthy lucre be guarded against : now if certain abuses are, 
 perhaps, committed by some idiots, the church neither teaches 
 nor approves them ; although the simplicity and good inten- 
 tion even of these idiots often extenuate if they do not ex- 
 cuse." 
 
 Op the Worship of Relics. (No. 28.) 
 
 " What is understood by the relics of the Saints ? 
 
 " The bodies of the Saints, bones, or other parts of the 
 body, or other things made holy by touching those bodies, 
 as garments, chains, or other instruments of suffering. 
 
 " Prove that they are to be honoured and venerated* 
 
 " It is proved from the passage from the Council of Trent, 
 already often cited. 
 
 " It is confirmed by various examples of Sacred Scrip- 
 ture: thus. Gen. 1. and Exod. xiii., the bones of Jacob and 
 Joseph were preserved with great honour and carried over 
 from Egypt, 4 Kgs. xiii., a dead body touching the bones of 
 Elisha revived: see, also, ch. xxiii. 18. Matt. ix. 20; a 
 woman afflicted with an issue of blood touches with the 
 greatest veneration the hem of Christ's garment and is heal- 
 ed. Acts v, 15., they expose believing sick persons in the 
 streets in order that at least the shadow of Peter might cover 
 them, and they might be healed : and ch. xix. 12., the hand- 
 kerchiefs and girdles of St. Paul were laid upon the sick, 
 and their maladies lefl them. 
 
 "To these are added the miracles done at the presence 
 or at the contact of the Sacred Cross and the relics of the 
 Saints. See St. Aug. S. xxii. de Civ. Dei., c. 8. it. Serm. 
 cccxxiii al. 31. de diver sis. 
 
 ** Finally, it is proved by reason, founded on the words 
 of St. Aug. ' Whoever has affection for a person, venerates 
 
350 WORSHIP AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 
 
 all those things which are left of him after death ;' there- 
 fore, as we venerate the Saints as members of Christ and 
 our intercessors, we consequently ought, also, to venerate 
 their relics with proper honour in memory of them. 
 
 " With what worship are relics honoured ? 
 
 " In a similar way and worship in which the images of 
 Christ and of the Saints, according to what has been said. 
 No. 27 ; and, therefore, with the same worship with which 
 the person is honoured, whose relics they are, but relative 
 and respective : for just as images are honoured, because 
 they represent the prototype or person ; so, also, relics in so 
 much as they are or have been connected with him. 
 
 " Obj. I. Christ, Matt, xxiii. 29, says. Woe to you Scribes 
 and Pharisees, hypocrites who build the sepulchres of the 
 prophets, and adorn the monuments of the Just ; therefore, 
 he forbids the worship of relics. 
 
 "An5. I deny the inference: because Christ does not 
 blame the deed itself, but the hypocrisy in the deed : for if 
 any one could have seen their hatred of heart against Christ, 
 whose heralds the prophets had been, he would have judged 
 that the Jews did this not with a religious intention in honour 
 of the Prophets, but rather for the triumph of their own 
 murderous parents. 
 
 " Obj. II. A dutiful son does not honour the instruments 
 of disgrace by which his father was put to death ; therefore, 
 the Christian ought not to venerate the cross, or the other 
 instruments of the death of Christ or the Martyrs. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : there is a disparity, because 
 the disgraceful instruments of the father, v. g., the scourge, 
 or the block, would be considered by the son only as the dis- 
 grace or misfortune of the father ; for if they had been the 
 cause of exaltation to the father, and of liberation from 
 bitter tyranny to the son, he would have held them in 
 esteem. We therefore venerate the cross, &c., not in so 
 far as they were the instruments of the wicked action of 
 torture, but inasmuch as they were instruments of the vic- 
 torious passion and exaltation, which also were made holy 
 by contact with the body of Christ or the Saints." 
 
WORSHIP AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 351 
 
 Corollaries concerning the worship of relics. (No. 29.) 
 
 " Would it therefore be proper to honour the lips of Judas, 
 the hands of the crucifiers, &c., on account of their touch- 
 ing the body of Christ 1 
 
 " Ans. By no means : because they were animate instru- 
 ments of iniquity, not made holy through contact with the 
 body of Christ, but rather dishonoured by the wickedness of 
 those, whose members they were. 
 
 " Is the Divine Virgin to be honoured with the respective 
 worship of latria on account of contact with Christ, just as 
 the cross of Christ is adored 1 
 
 " Ans. St. Thom. art. 5. no ; there is a disparity, because 
 the cross is an inanimate thing, the worship of which is in 
 itself only respective; but as the B. Virgin is a person 
 capable of absolute worship with respect to herself, thus the 
 honour paid to her is considered absolute, and not respec- 
 tive : but the Divine Virgin cannot be adored with the abso- 
 lute worship of latria ; therefore, neither with the respective. 
 
 " Observe, that the true cross of Christ has both the 
 claim of an image, inasmuch as it represents the figure of 
 the crucified Lord ; and the claim of a relic on account of 
 contact with the sacred body and blood : but other crosses 
 made after the likeness of the real cross have only the claim 
 of an image. 
 
 " Obj. Therefore, not only the real nails and the real 
 spears, but also, all nails and all spears have the claim of an 
 image of Christ crucified, and thus may be honoured. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : for any kind of similitude 
 is not sufficient for an image, (and thus an egg is not said to 
 be the image of another egg ;) but it is requisite that one be 
 expressed by the other for its similitude : just as crosses are 
 now made only to express the first on which Christ was 
 crucified ; as they now have no other use amongst us since 
 the edict of Constantino the Great, prohibiting criminals to be 
 crucified : but not all nails or spears are made for the repre- 
 sentation of those which were the instruments of Christ's 
 passion, but they are made for other purposes : yet if they 
 should be made as a representation of the former, they 
 would not be unworthy of proper veneration ; as when they 
 are painted in a picture together with a cross. 
 
 *,i ** ^ " >> >^ 
 
352 WORSHIP AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 
 
 " From these things, it is plain, how justly the Emperor 
 Theodosius has forbidden that crosses should be painted or 
 sculptured on the ground, v. g., on the stones of monuments, 
 on account of the danger of trampling them with the feet. 
 
 " In what sense does the church sing : O cross ! Hail 
 only hope 1 
 
 *' I answer with Sylvius, because by a personification the 
 cross is introduced for him who hangs on the cross : and 
 thus the sense is : O Christ crucified ! Hail our only 
 hope. 
 
 "Observe finally, that, although true relics may be pri- 
 vately worshipped, yet they may not be exposed for public 
 veneration in the temple, unless they have been approved by 
 the Ordinary or Bishop. Thus the Council of Trent, sess. 
 
 XXV." 
 
 For a detailed refutation of the Romish reasons in favour 
 of the worship of Saints, Images, and Relics, my reader 
 must permit me to refer him to my Lectures on Romanism. 
 My limits will not permit me to repeat the argument in this 
 connection, and he will there find as satisfactory an answer 
 as I am able to give. The words of Paul to Elymas may 
 aptly be addressed to Anti-christ, who with all deceivable- 
 ness of unrighteousness endeavours to destroy the souls of 
 men. " O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of 
 the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not 
 cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord ?" 
 
 Of the Virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary. 
 
 " Prove that Mary always remained a Virgin. 
 
 " It is proved, because she was a Virgin before the birth 
 and in the birth (of Christ), from the prophecy of Isaiah, 
 ch. vii. V. 14. Behold a Virgin shall conceive and hear 
 a son : where it is not only signified that she who was before 
 a Virgin should conceive and bear ; for what sign or prodigy 
 would it be, that she who was a Virgin should conceive and 
 bear having lost her virginity ? where the prophet still fore- 
 tells it as a great and extraordinary sign that she shall con- 
 ceive and bear. 
 
 " The same is proved by the Apostles' creed : Born 
 of the Virgin Mary. 
 
 " That she remained a Virgin also after the birth is proved 
 
WORSHIP AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 353 
 
 by divine tradition against the heretics, Jovinian, and Hel- 
 vidius ; and this has been settled in various councils ; sig- 
 nally in general ones, &c. 
 
 " Ohj. I. It is said. Matt. i. 25. of Joseph ; he knew her 
 not until she brought forth her Jirst horn son ; therefore, 
 he knew her after the birth, and the Divine Virgin brought 
 fortli a second born. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : because the particle until 
 implies that this was not done before the birth, in order that 
 it may be signified that the virginity was unimpaired until 
 the birth, the contrary of which seemed to proceed from the 
 birth itself: but concerning the following time nothing is 
 affirmed : indeed, it is clearly supposed, that it had been 
 much less lost after the birth : thus, when it is said. Gen. 
 viii. 7 : the raven did not return until the waters were dri- 
 ed up ; it is not signified that it afterwards returned, but 
 rather that it never returned. To the second part of the 
 inference, it is replied that in Scripture, every one is called 
 the first born, before whom no one has been born, although 
 he may be the only son. 
 
 " ObJ. II. Matt. xii. Christ is said to have had brethren, 
 therefore, &c. 
 
 " I answer, they were not Christ's own brothers, neither 
 by the Virgin Mary, nor by St. Joseph : but in Scripture 
 phrase relations or cousins are called so, even beyond the 
 first degree^ 
 
 " The Holy Fathers commonly suppose that the Blessed 
 Virgin Mary had a vow of preserving her virginity ; and 
 hence, St. Aug. lib. de virginit. ch. iv. says, ' Mary replied 
 to the angel when he announced, Hoto shall this be, since I 
 know not a man ! Which she certainly would not have 
 said, unless she had devoted herself as a Virgin to God.' 
 See more at length, St. Thom. art. 4." 
 
 The perpetual virginity of Mary is a point which must be 
 maintained at all hazards, for great is Diana of the Ephe- 
 sians ! We venerate the memory of the humble and holy 
 Mary, and sure we are that if the spirits of the just in glory 
 could take cognizance of all that transpires on earth, her 
 heart would be pained by the idolatrous worship that is paid 
 30 - 
 
354 WORSHIP AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 
 
 to her. The Church of Rome makes a goddess of the 
 Virgin Mary; she is the Diana of the Ronnans ! The 
 Priests must sustain her claim to perpetual virginity, or their 
 craft is in danger to be set at nought, the magnificence of 
 Holy Mother would be destroyed at once, if this key-stone 
 of the arch of idolatry were knocked out. But after all that 
 has been said, the utmost that can be alleged in favour of the 
 question is that it is a doubtful case ; probability is greatly 
 against it. Certainly, if the Lord had intended that the vir- 
 ginity of Mary should be an article of faith, to be always 
 held and cherished by believers to the end of time, he would 
 have clearly revealed it in the Scriptures, " which are able 
 to make wise unto salvation." We need not say that there 
 is no such declaration. The Evangelists seldom mention 
 the name of Mary after the history of the Saviour's birth 
 and childhood, and the Apostles never speak of her at all. 
 The virginity of Mary before the birth of Christ, is plainly 
 a doctrine of revelation, which can be disputed only by the 
 most reckless infidels ; but the passage cited in the preced- 
 ing section appears to my mind conclusive evidence against 
 the doctrine of the Church of Rome, especially as it is dis- 
 tinctly afiirmed by the Holy Spirit, that marriage is honour- 
 able in all. As for tradition and St. Augustine, they may 
 both be very good in their way, but as proof they are very 
 indifl^erent. 
 
 The chapter which treats of the nativity of Christ, closes 
 with the following paragraph, which I prefer offering in the 
 original Latin. 
 
 " Peperit autem B. Virgo absque dolore vel infirmitate, ut 
 dicitur Can. 79. Concilii Trullani ; egressus est enim Chris- 
 tus ex utero clauso matris : quia decebat, ut, quae sine libi- 
 dine conceperat, sine dolore pareret ; neque tantum sine 
 dolore, sed cum ingenti jucunditate et loetitia B. Virgo 
 peperit, juxta illud Isaia) cap. xxxv. 2 : Germinans germi- 
 nabif, et exultahit Icetabunda et laudans." 
 
WORSHIP AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 355 
 
 In the following section, the question is asked : 
 
 " Where and by whom was Christ circumcised ? 
 
 " Very likely in the same stable in which he was born 
 and very probably by St. Joseph : because no place was 
 determined for this, nor was that office sacred." 
 
 In No. 30, we are told that " it is disputed whether Joseph 
 was a blacksmith or a carpenter : yet from the opinion of 
 the ancient Christians and common tradition, the latter ap- 
 pears the more probable." 
 
 The question is also asked : " Had Christ several gar- 
 ments? Ans. Yes," &c. And it is also stated that " he did 
 not walk barefoot, but with sandals, as is gathered from 
 Mark vi. 9: but shod with sandals; but he did not use 
 shoes, because he seems to have forbidden that. Matt. x. 9, 
 10," &c. 
 
 To No. 41, the following N. B. is appended : 
 
 " Observe against the heretics that Christ rose from the 
 sepulchre when closed : for the glorious body penetrated the 
 stone, just as he afterwards came to his disciples when the 
 doors were shut : but the stone was rolled away from the 
 monument by the angel only at the approach of the women 
 to the sepulchre : therefore, certain painters erroneously de- 
 pict Christ as rising from the open sepulchre." 
 
 At the close of No. 42, which treats of the apparitions 
 of Christ after his resurrection, we find the following re- 
 marks : 
 
 " Did not Christ appear to his mother? 
 
 " I answer according to common opinion, yes ; and that 
 on the first day of the resurrection : for so says the Holy 
 Father, Bk. iii. de virginibus : ' therefore, Mary saw the 
 resurrection of the Lord, and saw it first and believed ;' and 
 this the affection. of Christ for his dearly beloved mother 
 appears to suggest. 
 
 " Oty*. Mark xvi. 9., it is said: he appeared "first to 
 Mary Magdalen ; therefore, not to his own mother. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : for Mark seems to be speak- 
 ing of those persons whose duty it would be to be witnesses 
 and proclaimers of the resurrection of Christ, or who should 
 confirm those who were doubtful concerning it : but these 
 things do not relate to the Divine Virgin," &c. 
 
356 CONCERNING THE RfVCRAMENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIV. 
 
 CONCEENING THE SaCRAMENTS. 
 
 Preface. 
 
 Decree of the Council of Florence. 
 
 " There are seven Sacraments of the New Law : viz., 
 Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme 
 Unction, Orders, and Marriage ; which differ greatly from 
 the Sacraments of the ancient law. For they did not cause 
 grace, but prefigured that it was to be given alone through 
 the passion of Christ : but these our Sacraments both con- 
 tain grace and confer it upon such as worthily receive them. 
 Of these, the first five have been ordained for the spiritual 
 perfection of every man in himself: the last two for the 
 government and increase of the whole church. For by 
 Baptism we are spiritually born again ,• through Confirma- 
 tion we are increased in grace and strengthened in the faith : 
 but being born again and strengthened we are nourished by 
 the divine aliment of the Eucharist. If through sin we con- 
 tract a malady of the soul, through Penance we are spiritu- 
 ally healed : spiritually, also, and corporeally, according as 
 it is expedient for the soul through Extreme Unction : but 
 by Orders the church is governed and spiritually increased : 
 by Marriage it is increased corporeally. All these Sacra- 
 ments are performed in three things, viz., in things as to 
 matter, in words as to form, and in the person of the minis- 
 ter conferring the Sacraments with the intention of doing 
 what the church does : if anything of these be wanting, the 
 Sacrament is not performed. Among these Sacraments 
 there are three. Baptism, Confirmation and Orders, which 
 impress character that is a certain indelible spiritual sign 
 distinct from the rest. And hence, they are not repeated in 
 the same person. But the other four do not impress charac* 
 ter, and admit of repetition." 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 357 
 
 Canons of the Council of Trent concerning 
 Sacraments in general. 
 
 " I. If any one shall say that the Sacrannents of the new 
 law have not all been instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord ; 
 or that they are more or less than seven ; viz., Baptism, 
 Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, 
 Orders, and Marriage: or, also, that any one of these seven 
 is not truly a Sacrament, let him be anathema ! (i. e. cursed 
 in this world and damned in the next.) 
 
 " II. If any one shall say that the Sacraments themselves 
 of the new law, do not differ from the Sacraments of the 
 old law, except, because the ceremonies are different, and 
 the external rites different : let him be anathema ! 
 
 " III. If any one shall say that these seven Sacraments 
 are so equal among themselves, that for no reason can one 
 be more worthy than another ; let him be anathema ! 
 
 " IV. If any one shall say that the Sacraments of the 
 new law are not necessary for salvation, but superfluous, 
 and that without them, or the desire of them, men may 
 through faith alone obtain from God the grace of justifica- 
 tion ; although all are not necessary for every person ; let 
 him be anathema ! 
 
 " V. If any one shall say that these Sacraments have 
 been instituted merely for the sake of nourishing faith ; let 
 him be accursed 1 
 
 "VI. If any one shall say that the Sacraments of the 
 new law do not contain the grace which they signify : or 
 that they do not confer the grace itself on those who put 
 no obstacle in the way, as if they were only the external 
 signs of grace or righteousness received by faith, and cer- 
 tain marks of Christian profession, by which among men 
 believers are discerned from infidels ; let him be anathema ! 
 
 *'VIf. If any one shall say that grace is not conferred 
 by Sacraments of this kind, always, and upon all, as far as 
 respects God, even if they rightly receive them ; let him be 
 anathema 1 
 
 " Vlll. If any one shall say that grace is not conferred 
 by the Sacraments of the new law themselves by their own 
 power, but that mere belief of the divine promise is sufficient 
 to obtain grace ; let him be anathema I 
 30 * 
 
358 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 " IX. If any one shall say that by the three Sacraments, 
 Baptism, Confirmation, and Orders, character is not impres- 
 sed on the soul, that is, a certain spiritual and indelible sign, 
 on which account they may not be repeated ; let him be 
 anathema ! 
 
 " X. If any one shall say that all Christians have power 
 to preach the word and administer all the Sacraments ; let 
 him be anathema ! 
 
 *' XI. If any one shall say that the intention at least of 
 doing what the church does, is not requisite in ministers, 
 when they perform and confer Sacraments; let him be 
 anathema ! 
 
 " XII. If any one shall say that a minister living in mor- 
 tal sin, does not perform or confer a Sacrament, although 
 he may have preserved all essential things which pertain to 
 performing or conferring a Sacrament; let him be ana- 
 thema ! 
 
 "XIII. If any one shall say that the received and ap- 
 proved rites of the Catholic Church, commonly used in the 
 solemn administration of the Sacraments, may be either 
 omitted by ministers at their option, without sin, or that they 
 may be changed for other new ones by any pastor of the 
 churches ; let him be anathema !" 
 
 Concerning the Matter and Form of the Sacraments. 
 (No. 5.) 
 
 " A Sacrament which is a certain moral entity consists 
 of two things as essential and intrinsic parts of which it is 
 composed : to wit, of things, as matter, and of words as 
 form ; yet the Eucharist is excepted according to what has 
 just been said. 
 
 " What is here understood by matter ? 
 
 " That sensible thing, which less methodically signifies 
 grace : whether that be a certain thing subsisting by itself, 
 or a substance as water in baptism, or whether it be a cer- 
 tain action concerning those things, as ablution, &c. 
 
 " What is here meant by form ? 
 
 " Ans. The words are meant by which the minister more 
 accurately and clearly restricts the sensible thing in the 
 Sacrament to signify the grace and spiritual effect ; as in 
 bajitisin, / baj)tize thee, &c. 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 359 
 
 " For what reason are the parts of Sacraments called by 
 the name of matter and form ? 
 
 '' Ans. We use these philosophical terms for the sake of 
 explanation, &c. 
 
 " It is to be observed, therefore, that in Sacraments pro- 
 perly there are no matter and form, but as it were the mat- 
 ter and form as St. Thorn, adds : yet for the sake of brevity 
 it has become customary to say simply the matter and 
 form." 
 
 Of various modes of changing the form, (No. 11.) 
 
 Tp TV* tC^ :^ ^ ^ 
 
 " The form is changed if in the same idiom synonymous 
 words are taken for those which the church employs ; and 
 it will be only an accidental change, if by common consent 
 they signify the same not only as to the thing, but also ex- 
 plicitly and distinctly, or if they signify the same in the 
 same manner. Hence, baptism would be valid if in place 
 of / baptize, should be said, I tcash, or I sprinkle ; but not 
 if if should be said, I cleanse or purge: because the cleans- 
 ing of sins by way of washing ought to be signified in bap- 
 tism. Nor would it even be valid, if any one should say : 
 / baptize thee in the name of the Most Holy Trinity : be- 
 cause the word Trinity does not signify the same thing in 
 the same manner. For it does not expressly signify the 
 Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. 
 
 " The form is changed by the transposition of the words, 
 concerning which the decision would be the same as above. 
 Hence, it would be no obstacle to the validity of baptism, if 
 any one should say : In the name of the Father, and of the 
 Son, and of the Holy Ghost, I baptize thee, &c. So too, 
 it would not invalidate the Eucharist according to Wiggers, 
 if the Priest should say, this body is mine, instead of this 
 is my body, &c., &c. 
 
 " The form may be changed by interruption in pronoun- 
 cing the form of the words. But whether a substantial or 
 accidental change is induced, depends upon this, whether the 
 delay of the interruption according to common opinion 
 separates, or whether it leaves morally one speech and one 
 sense ; and hence it would be only an accidental change, 
 if some one between the words of the form, should sneeze 
 
360 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 or cough once : so, also, after the minister has said, / bap- 
 tize thee, if he should say to some who are chatting, be still, 
 and should immediately subjoin in the name of the Father, 
 &c., the Sacrament would subsist, &c. 
 
 " The form is changed by an addition, concerning which 
 the reason is the same as above ; and hence, if any one 
 with the Arians should baptize in the name of the Father, 
 the greater, and of the Son, the less, &c., he would not 
 perform the Sacrament. 
 
 " By the subtraction of a word or syllable : which change 
 will be substantial or accidental, according as the word omit- 
 ted concerns the essence of the form or not. 
 
 " A change of form may be made by the corruption of the 
 words : concerning which St. Thomas speaks thus : If the 
 corruption is such that it entirely destroys the sense of the 
 phrase, the Sacrament appears not to be performed : and 
 this principally happens, when a corruption is made which 
 concerns the principle of the sentence : suppose if instead of 
 that, which is in the name of the Father, he should say in 
 the name of the Mother. But if the sense of the discourse 
 is not entirely destroyed, the Sacrament is performed notwith- 
 standing : and this principally happens when a corruption is 
 made with respect to the end : suppose if any one should 
 say : In nomine Patrias et Filias, &c. &c. 
 
 " Thus also all are of opinion that a stutterer performs the 
 Sacrament, although he may separate the first syllable : v. 
 g. E ego te te bap baptizo, &c. I, I bap baptize thee 
 thee, &c., also ho hoc est co corpus me meum. The this is 
 me my ho body : also if instead of corpus, copus should be 
 said, in place of calix, calis, &c. And hence says Billuarl, 
 let the scrupulous observe these things, who frequently repeat 
 the words irreverently and for the purpose of ridicule, &c." 
 
 Concerning the intention of the Minister relative to the 
 change of Form. (No. 12.) 
 
 " May the intention of the minister effect that the change 
 of the form is substantial or accidental ? 
 
 " If the form is ambiguous or equivocal on account of the 
 change, so that according to the common mode of speaking 
 it receives a twofold sense, viz. the legitimate sense of the 
 form, and a false one ; then it depends on the intention of the 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 801 
 
 minister, whether the change is substantial, or accidental : 
 or he intends the true and legitimate sense, and it will be 
 only accidental : but otherwise substantial. 
 
 " Therefore if it be asked, what is to be said concerning 
 this form : I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of 
 the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and of the Blessed Virgin 
 Mary? 
 
 " I answer by making a distinction with St. Thomas, art. 
 8. in Corp. ' The change will be substantial if it be so 
 meant that the person is to be baptized in the name of the 
 Virgin Mary, just as in the name of the Trinity : for such a 
 sense would destroy the verity of the Sacrament : but if it be 
 so understood, that (and in the name of the Blessed Virgin) 
 is added not as if the name of the Blessed Virgin can effect 
 anything in baptism, but that her intercession may be of 
 advantage to the baptized person in order to preserve the 
 baptismal grace, the perfection of the Sacrament is not de- 
 stroyed.' 
 
 " Tournely rejects this distinction, saying that such a 
 baptism is entirely invalid. 
 
 " If the form is essentially invalid, the minister cannot 
 supply the defect by his own intention : for the form consists 
 in the settled sense of the words, but words have their signifi- 
 cation from common application and custom, and not from 
 the application of any private person whatsoever. 
 
 " If the form when changed retains altogether the same 
 sense with the essential form, then whatever may be the pri- 
 vate intention of the minister with respect to the signification 
 of the words, the change will be only accidental, and the 
 Sacrament is performed, so far as the form is concerned. 
 
 " It is said : In so far as the form is concerned ; because 
 the intention is required in the minister, of doing whatever 
 the Church does and Christ has appointed : and hence he who 
 knowingly introduces an accidental change, which he erro- 
 neously supposes to be essential, regularly does not perform 
 the Sacrament: not indeed through defect of the matter or 
 form, but through defect of the intention of doing what the 
 Church does," &c. 
 
 It is not lawful except in case of absolute necessity, to 
 make use of a doubtful form or matter in the administration 
 of the Sacraments. (No. 13.) 
 
362 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 To make a substantial change is a mortal sin : it is a sin 
 of sacrilege against religion, because it contains grievous 
 irreverence towards the Sacrament, and towards Christ him- 
 self, the author of the Sacraments. It is also a sin against 
 love to our neighbour, and against justice. — An accidental 
 change for a just reason is no sin at all ; but if done from 
 contempt, &c. it is a mortal sin, though the change be trifling. 
 
 "Authors observe, that although ignorance may excuse 
 certain laymen from mortal sin, who baptize in a case of 
 necessity with a form essentially or accidentally changed, yet 
 it does not excuse midwives, who ought to know the cere- 
 mony of baptism by heart, before they are admitted to the 
 office of a midwife, as the Roman ritual and the lid provincial 
 Synod of Mechlin prescribe. In like manner ignorance will 
 not excuse a minister ex officio, as he ought to know what 
 things belong to his own office." 
 
 If the form is so changed as to invalidate the Sacrament, 
 the Sacrament must be repeated. 
 
 If there is a reasonable doubt whether it has been legiti- 
 mately pronounced, then it is lawful to repeat it. If there is 
 no reasonable doubt, it is improper. (No. 14.) 
 
 Do the Sacraments of the New Law confer grace by their 
 own power (ex opere operato ?) (No. 18.) 
 
 " It is a Catholic doctrine that the Sacraments of the new 
 law contain grace, and that they confer it by their own power 
 was decreed in the Council of Trent, sess. 7. can. 8. Con- 
 cerning Sacraments, &c. * Whoever shall say that by the 
 Sacraments themselves of the new law, grace is not con- 
 ferred by their simple administration, let him be accursed.' 
 
 " In what sense does the Council there say, canon 6., that 
 the Sacraments of the New Law contain grace? 
 
 " Not as if grace were in the Sacraments, as the accident 
 in the subject, a thing in a place, or liquor in a vessel, (as 
 Calvin basely calumniates ;) but that they contain grace by 
 way of cause and instrumentally ; or as Steyaert says, inas- 
 much as they are not only signs of grace, like those of the 
 old law, but also instrumental causes, from which it is proper 
 to derive it." 
 
 This theory is then sustained as follows. 
 
 " John, iii. 5. It is said, ' unless a man be born again of 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 363 
 
 water and of the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the king- 
 dom of God ;' where the power of regeneration is attributed 
 not less to the water than to the Holy Ghost ; to the water 
 doubtless as the instrument, and to the Holy Ghost as the 
 principal cause. 
 
 " In a similar way, Eph. v. 26, the apostle says, * cleans- 
 ing it by the laver of water in the word of life ;' therefore 
 the baptism of water truly cleanses. See more texts in au- 
 thors. 
 
 " It is proved, 2. If Sacraments could not confer grace 
 by their due administration, but could only excite faith in the 
 divine promises (as sectarians profess,) it would follow, 1. 
 that baptism conferred on a child would be of no efficacy : 
 2. that a Sacrament conferred in the Latin or Greek language 
 would effect nothing for him, who does not understand this 
 idiom : 3. that a Sacrament sometimes may afford grace to 
 the spectators, in whom it might excite faith, and not to the 
 receiver himself, in whom perhaps faith might not be excited. 
 
 *' Calvin objects, 1 Pet. iii. 20 and 21, it is said : ' eight 
 souls were saved by water ; whereunto baptism being of the 
 like form now saveth you also : not the putting away of the 
 filth of the flesh, but the examination of a good conscience 
 towards God :' therefore baptism does not confer grace, but 
 faith, which is called the examination of a good conscience. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the inference : for the sense of this passage is 
 that baptism does not save us precisely through external 
 washing, by which the filth of the body is washed off, as the 
 baptism or purification of the Jews did : but by internally 
 cleansing the soul from sins through the proper deposition 
 of the internal conscience. See a more extended explanation 
 in authors. 
 
 " Obj. II. If Sacraments confer grace . by their due ad- 
 ministration, a proper disposition is not required in the recipi- 
 ent, nor does it contribute to a greater or less conferring of 
 grace : but these things are false ; therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. I deny the maj., for it is certain that in order to 
 a profitable reception of a Sacrament, a proper disposition is 
 required in adults ; and according as this is greater or less, 
 so much the greater or less will be the grace to be conferred, 
 as the Council of Trent teaches, sess. 6. ch. 7. 
 
 "But this disposition is only an indispensable requisite : 
 
364 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 because Sacraments act in the manner of natural agents, 
 which effect is more or less according to the greater or less 
 capacity or disposition of the subject : which disposition still 
 has no efficiency ; as is plain in fire, which burns dry wood 
 more effectually than green, although the dryness is merely 
 the remover of a hindrance, or an indispensable requisite and 
 not the efficient cause of combustion. 
 
 Something similar is found in those whom Christ miracu- 
 lously cured ; of whom although it was required that they 
 should believe, yet the cure was not effected by their own 
 faith, but by the virtue of Christ." 
 
 Section 19. discusses the question whether the Sacraments 
 cause grace physically or morally. The opinion that they 
 cause it physically is the more probable. 
 
 In No. 22., which treats of the grace peculiar to each 
 Sacrament, this passage occurs : 
 
 " Mention briefly the graces which are peculiar to each 
 Sacrament. 
 
 " Ans. In baptism, is habitual grace, in so far as it is 
 regenerative, and as it gives to a person his first spiritual 
 existence, destroying every fault and punishment. 
 
 " Actual grace is the assistance which is afterwards given 
 in its own time in order to preserve the purity of the soul, to 
 live in a Christian manner, and to receive the other Sacra- 
 ments worthily. 
 
 *' In the Sacrament of confirmation, habitual grace or its 
 increase is corroborative and augmentative of regeneration. 
 
 " The aids of actual grace are in order to keep and pro- 
 fess the faith constantly, and to overcome contrary tempta- 
 tions. 
 
 " In the Eucharist sanctifying grace tends to nourish spi- 
 ritual life, and to unite the person with God by more fervent 
 performance of virtues, &c. 
 
 " The habitual grace of the Sacrament of penance tends 
 to make reparation by way of spiritual healing and resusci- 
 tation, &c. 
 
 " The habitual grace of Extreme Unction tends more fully 
 to heal the soul, &c. 
 
 " The habitual grace of the Sacrament of Orders is minis- 
 trative, or in order to the due performance of the sacred 
 functions of the office, &c. 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 365 
 
 *' Finally the habitual grace of the Sacrament of matri- 
 mony tends to unite the minds, and to restrain the lusts of 
 the flesh, &c. &c." 
 
 No. 26. treats of the Sacramental character. This is a 
 spiritual and indelible sign impressed on the soul. It is called 
 spiritual not only because the soul on which it is impressed 
 is spiritual, but also because it is the cause of spirituality. 
 *' It is indelible so that it never can be destroyed either in this 
 world or in the world to come, but it will remain in the good 
 for their glory, and in the bad to their disgrace. Hence if a 
 priest should arise from the dead, he would not have to be 
 again baptized, confirmed or ordained. It would be another 
 thing if one of a married couple should be raised from the 
 dead ; for then they would have to be united : because the 
 bond of marriage is dissolved by death." Baptism, confirma- 
 tion and orders confer this character. (No. 27.) 
 
 In No. 34. which treats of the faith and probity of the 
 minister, we are informed, 
 
 " Neither the probity nor the faith of the minister is neces- 
 sary to the validity or effect of the Sacrament : so that all 
 who are out of a state of grace, as well infidels and heretics 
 as believers, whether excommunicated, suspended, degraded 
 persons, &c. may confer Sacraments in a valid and profit- 
 able manner, if only the other requisites to the validity and 
 effect of the Sacraments are afforded." 
 
 " The reason is, because the Sacraments do not take effect 
 from the virtue of the merits or faith of the minister, but from 
 a divine virtue and from the merits of Christ, which cannot 
 be hindered by the wickedness of others," &c. 
 
 " To administer the Sacraments unworthily or in a state 
 of mortal sin, is in itself a mortal sin of sacrilege: but any 
 one is regarded as administering thus unworthily, when he 
 is conscious to himself of mortal sin, and ventures to do it 
 without sincere repentance." (No. 35.) 
 
 In a case of this kind it is not sufficient that the Priest is 
 sorry for the sin, but he must confess sacramentally. (No. 37.) 
 
 It is not lawful to ask or receive Sacraments from a minis- 
 ter who is not tolerated, that is who has been denounced as 
 one whom the faithful must avoid, except in cases of extreme 
 necessity : if there is danger of some one's dying without 
 Baptism, &ic. 
 31 
 
366 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 Concerning the intention necessary on the part of 
 THE Minister. (No. 39.) 
 
 " Is intention in the njinister requisite to the valid perform- 
 ance of a Sacrament ? 
 
 " Yes ; to wit, the intention of doing what the Church 
 does : so that a Sacrament conferred through mimicry and 
 for ridicule, or by a crazy, drunken man, or in any other 
 way devoid of reason, is no Sacrament at all. 
 
 " This doctrine the Council of Florence delivers, and like- 
 wise the Council of Trent, sess. 7. can. 11. of the Sacra- 
 ments : * If any one shall say that the intention is not re- 
 quired in ministers, when they perform and confer Sacra- 
 ments, at least of doing what the Church does, let him be 
 accursed.' 
 
 " The primary reason of this is sought from the institution 
 of Christ, which is clear, especially from tradition. 
 
 " Besides it may also be inferred from the words and the 
 manner in which Christ instituted the Sacraments: v. g. 
 when he said : Whose sins ye remit — and tvhose ye retain^ 
 &c. ; which words suppose that the minister confers the Sa- 
 craments with full purpose and deliberation." 
 
 " It is to be observed that the intention is an act of the will 
 tending towards the object : and hence the necessary intention 
 in the minister consists in the act of his will, by which he 
 wills the external performance of the Sacraments, with the 
 intention of doing what the Church does." This intention is 
 distinguished as actual, virtual, habitual, and interpretative. 
 
 " Actual intention is the present and actual application of 
 the mind to that which is deliberately done. 
 
 " Does this require that any one must formally say in his 
 heart or by his lips — I intend, I wish to do this, &c., v. g. I 
 intend to baptize, to consecrate, &c. ? 
 
 " No : but it is enough that any one when called to the 
 administration of the Sacraments, and girding himself for this 
 purpose, begins reverently to handle the matter, &c. 
 
 " Indeed those scrupulous reflections upon the intention 
 itself are to be disapproved, inasmuch as they hinder devo- 
 tion and diminish attention relative to the very object of the 
 act." 
 
 " Virtual intention is that by which some person by the 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 367 
 
 influence of the actual intention previously entertained and 
 still morally persevering, with self-possession applies himself 
 to the duty and proceeds in its performance, although on 
 account of some mental distraction, he does not notice the 
 object of his intention or what he is doing." 
 
 " Habitual intention is that which consists only in a certain 
 habitual disposition : such is a past wish that has been inter- 
 rupted, also a disposition of the will, which neither actually 
 exists, nor ever has existed, but which would be elicited if 
 this or that should occur to the mind." 
 
 " Interpretative intention is that which does not proceed 
 from the will as the eliciting principle, but only as the volun- 
 tary effect in the caiise according to moral interpretation ; 
 such is V. g. in a drunken person, who knows that he has 
 been accustomed to perform sacramental actions." 
 
 Habitual and interpretative intentions are not sufficient ; but 
 actual and virtual ones are. 
 
 " Therefore he, who advertently has gone to the baptistry, 
 confessional, altar, &c. in order to perform some ministerial 
 duty, baptizes, absolves, consecrates, &c. in a valid manner, 
 although at the time of the ministration he should be dis- 
 tracted." 
 
 "Say the same of a priest, who, being roused at midnight 
 in order immediately to administer the Sacrament of bap- 
 tism, penance. Extreme Unction, &c., hastens thus half-asleep 
 to the baptistry, &c., and whilst still thus confused adminis- 
 ters the Sacrament." 
 
 In No. 41, the following cases are solved. 
 
 " Is a right intention in the minister requisite to the per- 
 fection of the Sacrament 1 
 
 " If only a right intention with regard to the Sacrament, 
 or at least an implicit intention of perforn\ing a Sacrament 
 is entertained, the Sacrament will be valid, although the 
 ulterior intention may not be right : and hence St. Thomas 
 teaches, 9, 64. art. 10. in c. : ' If a priest intends to bap- 
 tize some woman that he may abuse her, or if he intends to 
 prepare the body of Christ that he may use it for poisoning ; 
 and because the former does not depend upon the latter, 
 hence it is that such perversity of intention does not destroy 
 the verity of the Sacrament, but the minister himself sins 
 grievously by such an intention.' 
 
368 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 " Ought the intention of the minister to l)e fixed as to a 
 certain person or matter? 
 
 " Yes, as is plain from the very forms of the Sacraments : 
 thus by I baptize thee, I absolve thee, a certain and deter- 
 mined person is designated ; and in the form of the Euchar- 
 ist, the pronoun hoc designates the determined matter to be 
 consecrated. 
 
 *' Hence in the Roman missal, where, concerning defects 
 of the mass, 87, we read thus : ' If any one has before him 
 eleven hosts, and intends to consecrate only ten : not deter- 
 mining which ten he intends : in these cases he does not 
 consecrate, because the intention is required.' For a reason 
 cannot be given, why in this case one should be consecrated 
 rather than another. 
 
 " What if any should think that there were only ten hosts, 
 and there should be eleven, or that he holds a single one 
 whilst he holds two ? 
 
 " They will all be regularly consecrated : because he has 
 the intention of consecrating that which was placed before 
 him ; or his intention is directed simply to the matter before 
 him," &c. 
 
 An intention which is based on certain conditions renders 
 the Sacrament invalid, unless the conditions are verified. 
 (No. 42.) 
 
 Of the number of the Sacraments. (No. 46.) 
 
 The Sacraments of the New Law are seven ; to wit. Bap- 
 tism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unc- 
 tion, Orders and Matrimony. 
 
 The primary reason of this is the will of Christ as made 
 known by divine tradition. " This number of seven is also 
 insinuated in various passages of Scripture. Thus Prov. ix. 
 1. it is said. Wisdom, which is Christ, has built a house for 
 herself that is the Church, and she hath hewn out seven 
 pillars, doubtless the seven Sacraments, which like so many 
 pillars sustain the church. 
 
 *' So in like manner, Exod. xxv. by the seven lamps which 
 were on one candlestick, this is implied : for there are seven 
 Sacraments, just so many as there are lamps, which illumine 
 the church," &c. (! I) 
 
 This peculiar exegesis is further sustained by an argument 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 369 
 
 based upon reason, thus. " These seven things seem neces- 
 sary for a man in order to live and preserve his life, &c. &;c. 
 — viz. that he should be ushered into the light, increased, 
 nourished ; healed, if he falls into sickness : that the weak- 
 ness of his strength be recruited ; farther as regards the state, 
 that magistrates may never be wanting by whose authority 
 and rule, government may be exercised : and lastly that by 
 the legitimate propagation of offspring it may preserve itself 
 and the human race." 
 
 " From all which things, since it appears that they suffi- 
 ciently correspond to that life by which the soul lives in God, 
 the number of the Sacraments may easily be inferred : for 
 thus by baptism a man is born again in Christ, &c." 
 
 CHAPTER XXXV. 
 Treatise concerning the Sacrament of Baptism. 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 Decree of the Council of Florence for the instruction of the 
 
 I Armenians. 
 
 "Holy Baptism, which is the gate of spiritual life, occupies the first 
 place of all the sacraments ; for by it we are made members of Christ 
 and of the body of the Church. And as through the first man, death 
 has passed upon all ; unless we are born again, of water and the Holy 
 Spirit, we cannot (as the Truth declares) enter into the kingdom of 
 heaven. The matter of this sacrament is true and natural water : nor 
 is it of importance whether it be cold or hot. But the form is : I bap- 
 tize thee in the name of the Father^ and of JLhe Son, and of the Holy 
 Ghost. Yet we do not deny but that also by these words, Let this ser- 
 vant of Christ be baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
 and of the Holy Ghost ; or, such a one is baptized by my hands, in the 
 name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, a true bap- 
 tism may be performed : because as the principal source from which 
 baptism derives its virtue is the Most Holy Trinity, and the instru- 
 mental one is the minister, if the act is expressed, which is exercised 
 by the minister himself^ with the invocation of the Moat Holy Trinity, 
 
 ni * 
 
370 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 the sacrament is performed. The minister of this sacrament is tlie 
 priest, on whom it is ex officio incumbent to baptize. But in case of 
 necessity, not only a priest, or deacon, but also a layman, or woman, 
 ndeed even a pagan and a heretic may baptize, provided only he ob- 
 serves the form of the Church, and intends to do what the Church does. 
 The effect of this sacrament is the remission of all original and actual 
 guilt ; also of all punishment, which is due for that guilt. On this ac- 
 count no satisfaction is to be enjoined upon baptized persons for past 
 sins ; but if they die before they commit any fault, they immediately 
 arrive at the kingdom of heaven, and tlie vision of God." 
 
 Canons of the Council of Trent concerning Baptism. 
 
 " 1. Whoever shall say that the baptism of John had the same virtue 
 as the baptism of Christ ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 2. Whoever shall say that true and natural water is not absolutely 
 necessary for baptism, and therefore wrests those words of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, as though they had been a kind of metaphor : ' Ex- 
 cept a man be born of water, and the Holy Spirit ;' let him be ac- 
 cursed ! 
 
 " 3. Whoever shall say that in the Roman Church, which is the mo- 
 ther and mistress of all churches, the doctrine concerning the sacra- 
 ment of baptism is not true ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 4. Whoever shall say that the baptism which is also given by he- 
 retics, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
 Ghost, with the intention of doing what the Church does, is not true 
 baptism ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 5. Whoever shall say that baptism is optional, that is, not neces- 
 sary to salvation ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 6. Whoever shall say that a baptized person cannot, even if he 
 would, lose grace, how much soever he may sin, unless he is unwil- 
 ling to believe ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 7. Whoever shall say that baptized persons, by baptism itself, be- 
 come debtors to preserve faith alone, and not the whole law of Christ; 
 let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 8. Whoever shall say that baptized persons are free from all pre- 
 cepts of Holy Church, which are either written or traditional, bo that 
 they are not bound to observe them, unless they choose to submit them- 
 selves to them of their own accord ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 9. Whoever shall say that men are so to be recalled to the memory 
 of the baptism which they have received, that they may regard all the 
 vows which arc made after baptism as null and void, by virtue of the 
 promise already made in baptism itself, as if by it they detract from 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 371 
 
 the faith wliich tliey have professed, and from the baptism itself; let 
 him be accursed ! 
 
 • " 10. Whoever shall say that all the sins which are committed after 
 baptism, by the mere remembrance and faith of the baptism received, 
 are either dismissed or become venial ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 11. Whoever shall say that a baptism, truly and with due ceremony 
 conferred, is to be repeated on him who has denied the faith of Christ 
 among infidels, when he is converted to repentance ; let him be ac- 
 cursed ! 
 
 " 12. Whoever shall say that no one is to be baptized, except at that 
 age at which Christ was baptized, or in the article of death ; let hira be 
 accursed ! 
 
 " 13. Whoever shall say that infants, because they have not the act 
 of faith, are not to be reckoned among believers after having received 
 baptism, and on tliis account are to be re-baptized when they arrive at 
 years of discretion ; or that it is better that their baptism be omitted, 
 than that they should be baptized in the faith only of the Church, when 
 they do not believe by their own act ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 14. Whoever shall say that baptized children of this kind, when 
 they have grown up, are to be asked whether they wish to have that 
 ratified which their sponsors promised in their name when they were 
 baptized ; and that when they reply that they are unwilling, they are 
 to be left to their own choice ; and that they are not in the mean 
 time to be compelled by any other punishment to a Christian life, ex- 
 cept that they be prohibited the enjoyment of the Eucharist, and the 
 otlior sacraments, until they repent ; let him be accursed !" 
 
 Concerning the Sacrament of Baptism. 
 
 The sacrament of baptism is defined as " the external 
 washing of the body, performed with the prescribed form 
 of words; and by the Roman Catechism : the sacrament of 
 regeneration through water in the word. But it is com- 
 monly defined, A sacrament instituted by Christ the Lord, 
 in which throvgh the external ablution of the body with the 
 invocation of the Most Holy Trinity, a person is spiritually 
 regenerated.'''* 
 
 " Did Christ himself baptize no one? 
 
 " Although it is said, John iv. 2, * Although Jesus did not 
 baptize, but his disciples ;' it is still on the whole probable, 
 that he at least baptized some one of the Apostles, lest the 
 Apostles, when unbaptized, should have baptized others : and 
 
372 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 therefore Nicephorus quotes from Eurodius Antiochanus, 
 that Christ himsetf with his own hands baptized Peter. 
 Others say, that Christ did this in the case of his mother and 
 John the Baptist." (No. 2.) 
 
 The remote matter of Baptism is all natural or elementary 
 water, and that only. 
 
 " Mention some kinds of natural water which are sufficient 
 for the matter of baptism. 
 
 " Such are the water of the sea, rain-water, water from a 
 spring, or river, mineral water ; whether it is muddy or 
 clear ; cold or hot ; whether it has been blessed or not. 
 
 " The same is maintained with S. Thom. concerning lye 
 and the waters of sulphur baths. So also of waters, dis- 
 solved from hail, snow, or ice, before the ablution. Henno 
 and Billuart say the same of the moisture of a pavement, or 
 of walls, in damp weather ; also of water strained out of 
 clay. 
 
 " On the other hand, baptism is invalid when performed 
 with clay, wine, thick beer, milk, oil, spittle, sweat, tears, 
 urine ; also with ice, snow or hail not yet dissolved ; also 
 most probably with rose water, or any other distilled from 
 trees, herbs, or flowers. 
 
 " Yet they maintain plausibly that it is valid with beer, 
 gruel, tea, and similar weak and light decoctions : but it 
 would certainly not be valid if the solution of the distilled 
 substances is made so strong that the liquor has more of the 
 foreign substance than of the water. It is more doubtful in 
 the case of water dissolved out of salt." (No. 3.) 
 
 " From the preceding remarks, infer 
 
 " 1. That every one who administers baptism is bound to 
 use the proper matter under mortal sin, properly speaking. 
 
 " 2. If the proper matter is not at hand, and necessity is 
 urgent, he may and should apply doubtful matter, always 
 preferring the less doubtful. 
 
 " 3. If the child thus baptized in doubtful matter after- 
 wards survives, it must be re-baptized on this condition in 
 proper matter. 
 
 " 4. But to use matter which is positively insufficient, (as 
 wine, oil, &c.) whatever necessity may urge, is useless and 
 unlawful." 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 373 
 
 In order Ihat baptism may be performed in a proper as 
 well as in a valid manner, observe 
 
 *' 1. Water from the baptismal font should be applied, and 
 this obligation is certainly important for a solemn baptism. 
 
 " 2. Braunman maintains the same concerning baptism, 
 privately administered : and hence the minister called for 
 such an emergency, must take with him a little flask of water 
 from the sacred font, or order it to be obtained. 
 
 " 3. Yet urgent necessity is excepted, or in case baptism 
 must be administered by a midwife, &c. 
 
 " 4. The water of the sacred font should be kept clean ; 
 and therefore too much chrism ought not to be mixed, nor 
 should it be spoiled in any other way : and hence a child in- 
 fected with a contagious disease ought not to be baptized over 
 the font, but away from the font, with water taken from the 
 font. 
 
 " 5. If the water in the font is frozen, or too cold, it may 
 be warmed with the hands, or mixed (but in a greater quan- 
 tity,) with common warm water. 
 
 *' 6. If the water of the sacred font has been so much di- 
 minished that a failure may be apprehended, other common 
 water may be mixed with it, yet in a smaller quantity. If it 
 has been corrupted, or in some other way become defective, 
 let fresh water be poured into the font when properly 
 cleansed, and let it be blessed, &c." (No. 4.) 
 
 The proximate matter of baptism is the application of the 
 remote matter, viz., natural water, or the corporeal ablution 
 itself. This ablution may be performed in a threefold man- 
 ner; 1, by immersion ; 2, by sprinkling ; and 3, by pouring 
 out, or pouring in, or pouring on. Any one of these three 
 modes is sufficient to constitute the sacrament valid. A three- 
 fold immersion, or sprinkling, &c., is not essential to the 
 vaUdity of the sacrament ; but the latter is enjoined, and 
 any one baptizing in any other manner would commit a 
 grievous offence in not observing the rite of the Church in an 
 important thing. (No. 5.) 
 
 In order necessarily to constitute a sacrament, the ablution 
 should be " generally such that the minister may be truly 
 said to wash the person to be baptized ; so that he may be 
 morally regarded as washed or cleansed : concerning which 
 the following things are requisite : 
 
374 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 " 1. That the ablution be performed by a minister, or by 
 the intervention of his agency ; for otherwise he could not 
 '.ruly say, / baptize thee; and hence if upon seeing some one 
 falling, or thrown by another person into a river, or washed 
 with water in some other way, he pronounces the words of 
 the form, it will be no sacrament. 
 
 " The same seems rather probable if he is baptized with 
 snow or ice, applied indeed by the minister, but dissolved 
 only after the application through the heat of the body of the 
 person to be baptized. Yet it is not necessary that the min 
 ister should immediately touch the water, or the person to be 
 baptized ; and hence in some places water is poured on the 
 head of the candidate for baptism, by means of a shell ; in 
 such a manner also the minister may consult his own safety 
 against a contagious disease, v. g., in time of pestilence. 
 
 " 2. It is requisite that the ablution be successive, so that 
 it be performed with some motion of the successive contact 
 of the water around the body : whether this successive con- 
 tact arises from the application of water to the body, (as is 
 done in baptism by effusion,) or from the application of the 
 body to the water, as in baptism by immersion. 
 
 " Hence the baptism would be invalid if the person to be 
 baptized should be held motionless in water that is not agi- 
 tated : also if only a few drops of water that has not been 
 stirred remain on his forehead without any local motion. 
 
 " 3. It must be the ablution of the body itself by the im- 
 mediate or physical contact of the water with the body : yet 
 it is not necessary that it wash off the filth. Hence the bap- 
 tism is not valid, if the water touches only the clothes : as 
 may easily happen in baptism by sprinkling. 
 
 " If the water touches only the hair, nails, the pelles se- 
 cundinse or the galea nativitatis, the baptism is very uncer- 
 tain ; hence they admonish that care must sedulously be 
 taken, that when persons who have much hair are brought 
 forward for baptism, that the skin be rubbed with the water, 
 lest the ablution be performed only on the hair. It should 
 likewise be enjoined upon midwives, that when they baptize 
 in a case of necessity, they first break the secondary skin, 
 in order that the water may immediately touch the body. 
 
 " 4. The ablution should be performed on so considerable 
 a part of the body, and with such a quantity of water, that 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 375 
 
 the man may in consequence be morally denommated washed 
 or cleansed. Hence it is rather probable that one or two 
 drops of water are not sufficient for baptism : yet because 
 some teach that it is enough if it only flows, in case of neces- 
 sity this may serve : it would be however on condition that 
 if he survives he must be rebaptized. For greater security, 
 that quantity of water should always be applied (if it is at 
 hand) which is certainly sufficient for baptism : and hence it 
 is better to exceed a little in the quantity than to be deficient." 
 (No. 6.) 
 
 As for the part of the body in which the ablution should 
 take place, according to the practice of the church, the head 
 is to be washed as the principal abode of the soul, and the 
 part in which all the senses are strongest ; but it is not neces- 
 sary that the whole head should be washed, but a considera- 
 ble part of it, or according to the practice of the church, the 
 top. The Roman ritual has decided in certain cases as fol- 
 lows. 
 
 " If an infant has put forth its head from the womb of the mo- 
 ther, and the danger of death is imminent, let it be baptized on 
 the head ; neither must it afterwards be baptized a second time, 
 if it comes forth alive. But if it has put forth another mem- 
 ber which gives indication of vital motion, it may be baptized 
 on it, if danger threatens ; and then if it survives when born, 
 it must on that condition be rebaptized : but if thus baptized 
 it afterwards comes forth from the womb dead, it ought to be 
 buried in consecrated ground. 
 
 " What if the infant baptized in this case of necessity, v. 
 g., in the hand, afterwards puts forth its head ] 
 
 " Ans. Without delay it must on this condition be rebap- 
 tized on the head, if the danger continues : but otherwise its 
 entire egression from the womb must be waited for. The 
 same is to be observed, if in a danger of this kind the baptism 
 may be rendered considerably more certain : v. g. an infant 
 before baptized only on the toes, ought now if the danger is 
 still urgent, to be conditionally baptized on the feet them- 
 selves. 
 
 " But what if there appears no sign of life in the part pro- 
 truding from the womb ? 
 
 " Ans. It may be baptized on that part on the condition, 
 if thou art alive ; for it has been found in the experience of 
 
376 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS, 
 
 midwives, that, although no sign of life may appear in the 
 part thus protruding, yet it may afterwards be found to be 
 alive. If, however, says our manual, no sign of life has 
 afterwards appeared, it may not be buried in consecrated 
 ground." (No. 7.) 
 
 " Is baptism validly conferred by a fatal ablution ? 
 
 ** Ans. It may be fatal in a twofold manner : one by reason 
 of the matter, as when an infant is baptized in boiling or 
 in poisoned water: and such ablution is sufficient for the 
 validity of baptism ; because it certainly remains a true 
 moral ablution, &c. The one is called fatal in itself, or by 
 reason of the action, as when any one throws a boy into a 
 well or a river without hope of emerging. This action is 
 certainly unlawful, &c. But it is controverted whether it is 
 sufficient to constitute valid baptism, if the form is pronounced 
 together with the intention of baptizing." The case is then 
 argued pro and con at considerable length. Suarez, Wig- 
 gers, Neesen, Pauwels, Van Roy, Boudart, &c., maintain the 
 affirmative ; and Scotus and the Scotists, Daelman, Peringue, 
 &;c., the negative. (No. 8.) 
 
 " What is the legitimate form of baptism ? 
 
 " Among the Latins it is this : I baptize thee in the name 
 of the Father i and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 
 That this is the legitimate one is plain from the Council of 
 Florence in the decree for the instruction of the Armenians ; 
 from the Council of Trent, sess. 7. can. 4; from the Roman 
 ritual, &c., and from the most certain practice of the whole 
 Western or Latin Church. But this form is gathered from 
 Matt, xxviii. : baptizing them in the name, &c. 
 
 " Among the Greeks the form is this : Let this servant, 
 or (as others now say,) this servant of Christ is baptized 
 in the name, &c. This also is legitimate and sufficient as is 
 plain from Eugenius, iv. in the same decree of the Council 
 of Florence : for each expresses the action of baptizing (the 
 Latins' in the act signified, the Greeks' in the act exercised,) 
 and the explicit invocation of the most holy Trinity. It is 
 evident also from the practice of the Church in not baptizing 
 Greeks, although some Greek schismatics have dared to 
 baptize those who had been baptized by Latins. The 
 Greeks use this form, in order to avoid and refute among 
 their own people, the error of the ancients, who attributed 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 377 
 
 the virtue of baptism to the persons baptizing as the principal 
 cause, and said with the Corinthian schismatics : I am of 
 Paul, I am of Cephas, &c. 
 
 " Which of these two forms is to be preferred? 
 
 " Ans. Each is to be observed respectively in its own 
 Church, and this under grievous sin, as Pauwels observes. 
 Further, both are to be approved as respectively proper, and 
 absolutely sufficient. The form of the Latins, however, is 
 more perspicuous, and corresponds better with the words of 
 Christ : Baptizing them in the name of the Father, (fee. 
 (No. 9.) As for the essentials of the form of Baptism it is 
 necessary that in it the person to be baptized is expressed, 
 either by the particle thee, or by his proper name, or in some 
 other way. The act of baptizing must also be expressed ; 
 and although the baptism would be valid in saying, I wash, 
 1 sprinkle, &c., yet the words I baptize are to be retained. 
 If the particle in is omitted, according to Daelman the Sacra- 
 ment becomes null and void, so also if the minister should say 
 in the names, instead of in the name ; but if the minister 
 should say in the name of the Father, and in the name of 
 the Son, &c., Sylvius, Van Roy, and Billuart think that it 
 is valid, because this multiplication does not imply a diver- 
 sity of virtue and essence : however, Boudart, Pauwels, 
 Neesen and Daelman more properly say the contrary : be- 
 cause although a diversity may not then be implied, identity 
 is certainly not signified. Baptism conferred under these 
 forms is not valid : / baptize thee in the name of the most 
 Holy Trinity, or in the name of the three divine Persons, 
 or in the name of the one and triune God, or in the name 
 of the first, and of the second, and of the third Person, or in 
 the name of the Omnipotent, of the Wise and of the Good.'''' 
 
 " Does the conjunction and belong to the essential form ? 
 
 " Ans. Some say it does : because, if it be taken away, 
 the distinction of the Persons is not sufficiently expressed. 
 The contrary, however, seems more probable to many ; 
 because it is sufficiently understood. The case would be 
 different, however, if it should be omitted in the sense of 
 Sabellius, in signifying that these three names designate the 
 same Person, endowed with three faculties," 6z;c., (No. 10.) 
 
 Baptism in the name of Christ only is never valid, (No. 
 
 11.) 
 
 32 
 
378 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 " Although any one may baptize in a case of necessity, 
 yet if several persons are present, the order of dignity is to 
 be preserved, of which the Roman ritual treats in these 
 words: 'If a Priest is present, let him be preferred to a 
 Deacon, the Deacon to a sub-Deacon, a Clergyman to a 
 layman, and a man to a woman, unless for the sake of 
 modesty it may be more proper for a woman rather than a 
 man (understand, also, a Priest and Pastor) to baptize an 
 infant not entirely brought forth, or unless the woman should 
 know the form and mode of baptizing better.' The latter 
 exception often takes place in midwives, who are usually 
 better instructed concerning the mode of baptizing than 
 others of the laity. But in the former case of exception, 
 the Pastor, if he is at hand, should remain present in some 
 place where he may observe that the form is not corrupted." 
 
 It is a mortal sin to invert this order of procedure in the 
 case of a Priest, even if he consents. In case of a Deacon, 
 it is not certain ; but in respect to others inferior to a Dea- 
 con, it is not a serious offence. 
 
 " Midwives are moreover to be instructed that in a dan- 
 gerous parturition they have water at hand, and that with 
 self-possession without consternation, attentively and fully, 
 and with a voice truly audible, they pronounce the words of 
 the form ; together with a proper ablution by natural water 
 on a proper part of the body of the person to be baptized, 
 according to what was said, (No. 7.) 
 
 "And hence, baptism (even supposing that the proper 
 ablution has taken place) is at least very much endangered, 
 when certain midwives in baptizing a child not entirely 
 brought forth, lest they should deject the mind of the mo- 
 ther, pronounce in a very low and modest tone : / baptize, 
 and after a little delay, thee, and again after a short pause, 
 in the name of the Father, <S^c. 
 
 Midwives are further admonished that they never venture 
 to baptize except in a case of real necessity ; if they do, they 
 commit a heinous sin. No Clergyman inferior to a Deacon, 
 and no layman may perform the peculiar ceremonies of 
 giving the name, presenting the godfather, &c. (No. 13.) 
 
 One person may baptize several at the same time, and in 
 a valid manner by a sufficient ablution with this form, 1 
 baptize you : but this is not proper except in a case of 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 379 
 
 necessity, when life is in danger, and there is no room for 
 delay. 
 
 No one may in a valid manner baptize himself. (No. 14.) 
 
 Baptism is necessary to salvation in every case except 
 martyrdom, according to the Scripture, John iii. 5 : ' Except 
 a man be born of water and the spirit, he cannot enter into 
 the kingdom of God." (No. 18.) 
 
 " Is baptism or a baptismal character necessarily a pre- 
 requisite for other sacraments ? 
 
 *'Ara5. 1. Il is necessarily a pre-requisite to the lawful recep- 
 tion of the others : for as the Council of Florence says : 
 * Holy Baptism holds the first place, because it is the gate of 
 spiritual life : for by it we are made members of Christ, and 
 of the body of the Church.' 
 
 " 2. It is indubitable that the sacrament of penance neces- 
 sarily requires previous baptism for its validity ; &c." 
 
 " In the practice of Christian life any other sacraments 
 whatever received before baptism, are to be considered as 
 null and void, and conferred in vain, although a person may 
 have received them in good faith, believing himself to be 
 baptized : because the validity of these sacraments is at 
 least uncertain : therefore sacraments of this kind after bap- 
 tism are at least to be repeated conditionally, if the baptized 
 person has hitherto been without them." (No. 19.) 
 
 Every person not yet baptized in a valid manner is a fit 
 subject of baptism, and is bound to receive this sacrament.^ 
 Even those who are born without original sin, as John the 
 Baptist, who was sanctified from his mother's womb. In- 
 fants are also fit subjects of baptism. (No. 20, 21.) 
 
 " May infants be baptized in the womb of the mother ? 
 
 " Ans. 1. If any part of the infant has already been 
 brought forth to light, it may and should be baptized on that 
 part, in case of necessity, according to what has been said. 
 (No. 7.) 
 
 " 2. An infant living in the womb can in no manner be 
 said to be baptized by the baptism of the mother, if it per- 
 chance happens that she is then baptized : because the infant 
 is distinct from the mother, both as to soul and body- 
 
 " »3. And hence if it is so shut up in the womb of the mo- 
 ther that it cannot be touched and washed with water, bap- 
 
380 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 tism is attempted uselessly and in vain : because ablution is a 
 necessary part of the sacrament. 
 
 " But the question is, whether a child, being as yet en- 
 tirely in the womb, may be baptized in a valid manner, if 
 after the labour has commenced it can be sprinkled with 
 water either by the hand or by some other instrument : as is 
 svj/iciently plain from the testimony of physicians and mid- 
 wives may be done ? 
 
 " The ancient and many more recent authors hold the 
 negative opinion, and prove it by the following arguments : 
 
 " 1. Because by baptism a person is born again, according 
 to that passage, John iii. 3, * Except a man be born a.gain,^ 
 <SfC., also v. 7 ; but no one can be said to be born again, or 
 to be re-born, unless he was born before : but in this case 
 the child has not been born, therefore, &c. 
 
 " 2. By the authority of S. Augustine, whom S. Thomas 
 cites, «Sz;c. 
 
 " 3. By the Roman ritual, which under the caption. Con- 
 cerning children to be baptized, says : * No one who is shut 
 up in the womb of the mother ought to be baptized.' And 
 our pastoral under the same head ; ' No one shut up in the 
 womb of the mother can be baptized.' 
 
 " Many of the more recent authors, however, maintain the 
 affirmative side, which they also attempt to prove in various 
 ways. 
 
 " 1. The infant in this case is born in a true sense, ac- 
 cording to Matt. i. 20, which was spoken by the angel to 
 Joseph, that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost, 
 
 " 2. Such a one is so far born as to contract original sin ; 
 therefore also that the remedy for it be applied. 
 
 " 3. An infant putting forth any part of the body may be 
 baptized, although it is not perfectly born : therefore like- 
 wise if it can be washed in the womb. 
 
 " 4. A child is baptized in a valid manner which has by 
 no means been brought to light by birth, but has been cut out 
 of the womb of the dead mother, (as S. Raymund, on this 
 account called unborn,) ; therefore likewise one that is con- 
 fined in the womb. 
 
 *' 5. Daelman replies to the authorities of the other c>pinion, 
 that the rituals, &c., proceeded from a false hypothesis, as 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 381 
 
 if such children could not really be washed ; the contrary of 
 which is certain at present. 
 
 " However this diversity of opinion may be, the latter is 
 certainly probable : and hence in a case of necessity, (in 
 which extremes must be tried,) it takes place, baptizing to be 
 sure under the condition : if thou art a capable subject; but 
 if afterwards such a child is brought forth to the light ahve, 
 it will have to be conditionably re-baptized. In this case, 
 however, it must then be observed, that warm water be ap- 
 plied, as cold water would greatly injure the mother : farther, 
 that the person thus baptizing break the secondary skin in 
 which the child is enclosed, in order that the water may im- 
 mediately wash the body itself, (and, if it may be, the head) : 
 but if he cannot break the secondary skin, the baptism is not 
 therefore to be omitted ; because according to some, this skin 
 is a part of the infant in this state." (No. 23.) 
 
 Concerning the Cesarean Section. (No. 24.) 
 
 " Is it lawful to Mil a pregnant mother that the fwtus 
 may he extracted alive, and he baptized ? 
 
 " Ans. No : although she may be despaired of by the physi- 
 cians : because it is never proper to put any one to death in 
 order that assistance may be given to another. Some ex- 
 cept the case, when the mother is condemned to death : but 
 it is better to defer the execution, even the notification of con- 
 demnation, until she is delivered. Some also say that the 
 section of a living mother is lawful, if a person is so skilful 
 that he can cut open the mother with a well-grounded hope 
 of her recovery, and then extract the child, which would 
 otherwise die without baptism ; especially in those cases, in 
 which this section is the only means, not only for saving the 
 child, but also for preserving the mother. But if a pregnant 
 woman is certainly dead, she ought immediately to be cut 
 open, that the fcetus may then be extracted, according to the 
 prescription of the Roman ritual, and the instructions of ^\, 
 Carolus Borr., &c. ; in order that if it is living, it may be 
 immediately baptized ; but if it is found to be certainly dead, 
 it may neither be baptized, nor buried in consecrated ground ; 
 unless it had- not yet been extracted from the womb ,* in which 
 case it may be left there, and be buried with the mother as a 
 part of her. Among the signs from which the death of the 
 32 * 
 
382 . CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 mother is inferred, the following are most generally assigned : 
 if the flame of a candle placed near the mouth is not at all 
 moved, or if no breath is perceptible on a mirror placed near 
 the mouth : but these frequently are deceptive. More certain 
 ones, are : 1. If the eyes become altogether flaccid, and lose 
 their brightness ; 2. Stiffness and inflexibility of the limbs, 
 so that it is only with difficulty that another position can be 
 imparted to them ; and when once it has been imparted they 
 do not restore themselves any more to their former condition, 
 unless perhaps slowly, but never entirely ; but if the members 
 restore themselves to their former condition with force, it is 
 a sign that the subject is still alive. As the want of per- 
 ceptible motion in the mother is not a certain sign of death, 
 much less is it so in her foetus: whose death should be con- 
 sidered nearly doubtful, so long as manifest putrefaction or 
 disruption of members is not observed : and therefore the 
 operation may not be omitted, because no motion can be per- 
 ceived in the womb. It is advised, that a tube be inserted in 
 the mouth of the mother, when dead, and in a similar way 
 patula uteri vagina servetur, in order that heat may be main- 
 tained in the womb, until the operation is commenced. The 
 said operation, however, (which is commonly called the 
 Caesarean,) is most conveniently performed by a surgeon, or 
 some other person skilled in this thing; in the absence of 
 whom it is incumbent on the priest to perform the same 
 operation ; for this reason the pastors of villages in which 
 there is a want of surgeons, &c., ought to be acquainted with 
 the mode of opening the womb of a dead mother without in- 
 juring the fcstus. 
 
 *' The mode of opening a dead pfegnant mother. at present 
 practised by physicians, and according to them the more easy 
 and expeditious one, is the following : with a knife or scalpel 
 let a transverse scissure be made in the upper part of the ab- 
 domen, (or a little below the thorax, in the middle of the 
 body,) so broad and deep that he may easily introduce his 
 finger into the cavity of the abdomen ; then introducing the 
 finger, dtc, &c., &c. 
 
 " When ovght the Ctesarean section to he instituted 1 
 " As the opinion is probable which says, that the foetus is 
 alive not only on the 40th or 80th day, but immediately upon 
 the conception, or at least in the first days after the concep- 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 383 
 
 tion : hence it is proper that it be instituted as often as a pro- 
 bable suspicion is entertained that the deceased has conceived : 
 but whether anyone can be obliged to do this before the for- 
 tieth day, I will not venture to affirm. 
 
 " These things and very many more most worthy to be 
 observed may be seen in Cangiamila, in the excellent work 
 on Sacred Embryology, or in the compendium of it which 
 Dinouart has published in the French tongue." 
 
 Of Baptizing an Abortive Foetus. (No. 25.) 
 
 " By an abortive foetus is meant one which is prematurely 
 brought forth to light. Ought such a one to be baptized ? 
 It should absolutely be baptized, if it is certain that it is 
 alive : conditionally, if it is doubtful whether it lives : by no 
 means can it be baptized if it is admitted that it is dead. 
 When is a foetus animated with a rational soul ? It is cer- 
 tain that the foetus is alive long before the birth, as experi- 
 ence proves in the case of infants cut out of the mother's 
 womb ; and hence Innocent XL justly condemned this 35 
 proposition : ' It seems probable that every foetus, so long as 
 it is in the womb, is without a rational soul, and then first 
 begins to have the same, when it is born.' However, it re- 
 mains uncertain at what time precisely the fostus is alive. 
 Many, among whom is Neesen, contend that a soul is never 
 infused into any except a well-organized body. Yet very 
 many physicians, and more recent theologians maintain that 
 this takes place immediately after the conception, or at most, 
 on the third or seventh day from the conception ; as may be 
 seen in the dissertation. On baptizing Abortions. 
 
 " Therefore, abortions, whether they have all the members 
 developed, or have not yet obtained that perfection : the for- 
 mer if they give evidence of life by motion, are absolutely 
 baptized : conditionally, however, if they manifest no mo- 
 tion, but are nevertheless not putrid or lacerated, although 
 they may appear livid, and without pulse, respiration, mo- 
 tion, and feeling. The latter, if they but appear to be human 
 embryos, even on the first days of pregnancy, are baptized 
 conditionally; although being very small and most imper- 
 fectly formed, they may be without perceptible motion : but 
 they are first baptized whilst enclosed in the film, in order 
 that time may not elapse, at the risk of their death, when 
 
384 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 they are exposed to the air : afterwards the skin is cautiously- 
 opened, and when it is unclosed, the foetus is again baptized, 
 on the condition, If tJiou art capable, ^c." 
 
 Directions are then given in order to ascertain whether the 
 premature birth is a fcetus or not. 
 
 Of baptizing Monsters and Idiots. (No. 26.) 
 
 " ' A monster,' says our pastoral, conformably to the Ro- 
 man ritual, ' which has not a human appearance, ought not to 
 be baptized : but the decision of a thing of this kind is most 
 properly to be derived from the head, (which is the seat of 
 reason and the senses,) ; therefore, if the head be human, or 
 nearly human, it may be baptized : if it is doubtful, it may 
 be baptized on the condition, if thou art a human being ;' 
 and thus if the head were that of a wild beast, and the other 
 limbs human, it ought to be baptized conditionally." 
 
 But the decision of the Roman ritual is called in question, 
 because the form of the human foetus, in the womb of the 
 mother, is so soft and flexible, that it may be deformed or 
 changed by the violent imagination or fright of the mother, 
 and thus the foetus, when born, may exliibit the form of a 
 brute ; and yet there is no sufficient proof to show that the 
 rational soul, by which the foetus was probably animated be- 
 fore the deformity was occasioned, has subsequently left the 
 body. We are then referred to the Sacred Embryology, 
 for information relative to the proper course to be pursued 
 with monsters which are the fruit of bestial intercourse ! 
 Directions are then offered by which it may be determined 
 whether the monster is single or double. 
 
 " If it has one head and one breast, it is certain that it is 
 only a single human being, although it may have, v. g., three 
 hands, feet, &c., and then it may be simply baptized. Or it 
 is plain that there are two human beings, when it has two 
 heads, and distinct breasts, although the other members may 
 not be double ; and then they may be baptized separately : 
 but if the danger of death is imminent, they may be washed 
 at once, by saying, I baptize you, <^^c. Suppose it is doubt- 
 ful whether there are one or more human beings, as when it 
 has two heads and breasts not well defined : then one may 
 be baptized absolutely, and the other under the condition 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 385 
 
 If thou art not baptized. It is the same whether it has two 
 heads and one breast, or the contrary." 
 
 My apology for offering the preceding Nos. to the English 
 reader is, that no adequate conception of the imbecile and 
 filthy fanaticism of the Church of Rome, can be afforded, 
 unless these features are exhibited without the Latin veil. 
 
 Infants are to be baptized as soon as possible after birth. 
 The degree of delay necessary to constitute mortal sin, is to 
 be determined by circumstances. Adults, if in danger of 
 death, must be baptized without delay ; and if no such danger 
 exists, they must not defer long. (No. 28.) 
 
 The effects of the sacrament of baptism, are grace and 
 character. Original sin is remitted in baptism, unless some 
 obstacle is in the way, besides all personal sins committed 
 before baptism, whether mortal or venial. All temporal and 
 eternal punishment, due on account of past sins, are also re- 
 mitted through baptism. (No. 29.) 
 
 Baptism, when once conferred in a valid manner, is not to 
 be repeated, for the following reasons : 
 
 "1. Because baptism is spiritual regeneration: and hence 
 as there is but one carnal birth in the case of one and the 
 same person, so too there is but one spiritual birth. 
 
 ^' 2. Because ba'ptism is a figure of the death, burial, and 
 resurrection of Christ. But Christ died, &c., but once ; there- 
 fore, &c. And hence, Heb. ch. vi., the repetition of baptism 
 is compared to the renewed crucifixion of Christ. 
 
 " 3. Because it impresses an indelible character with a 
 kind of consecration of the person. 
 
 " 4. Because it has been instituted as the remedy of ori- 
 ginal sin, which is single in every person, and once remitted, 
 never returns." (No. 32.) 
 
 The repetition of baptism with the knowledge that it has 
 once been conferred in a valid manner, is a grievous sin of 
 sacrilege, both in the minister and in the recipient. The 
 penalty of this crime is in the cival law capital, both 
 with respect to the person rebaptizing, and the person rebap- 
 tized. (No. 33.) 
 
 Whether persons baptized by midwives are to be rebap- 
 tized, depends upon the knowledge, prudence, and mode of 
 
386 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 applying the matter and form : if there is reason to believe 
 that owing to the trepidation or ignorance of the operator, 
 something essential in matter or form has been omitted, they 
 must be rebaptized ; but in other cases all that is necessary 
 is to supply the usual ceremonies. (No. 36.) 
 
 " Are those who have been baptized by heretics to be re- 
 baptized ? 
 
 " In the first place they are not to be rebaptized, precisely 
 for the reason that they have been baptized by heretics : be- 
 cause it is a settled point in the faith, that a heretic who ob- 
 serves all the essentials, baptizes in a valid manner. Yet, 
 because there is just reason for doubting whether sectarian 
 heretics rightly apply all the essentials, as it has been learned 
 from experience that these heretics either apply rose-water 
 for the sake of honour, or that one pours the water, and an- 
 other pronounces the form, or that they are frequently negli- 
 gent about essentials in some other way, v. g., the ablution ; 
 hence our pastorale has decided, as well the modern as the 
 ancient, that persons baptized by those heretics, (say Lu- 
 therans, Calvinists, Anabaptists, and other sectarians of this 
 kind,) are to be rebaptized conditionally when they are con- 
 verted from heresy to the faith, &c. But as there is no rea- 
 son for doubting that all the essentials are duly observed by 
 Jansenist ministers, hence persons baptized by them ought by 
 no means to be rebaptized. Neither would a person baptized 
 by any heretic whatsoever have to be rebaptized, if a Catholic 
 eye-witness, and one skilled in the point, should testify that 
 all the essentials had been observed ; unless perhaps there 
 should be some doubt remaining concerning the intention of 
 the one who conferred the baptism : but as this is very rare, 
 Benedict XIV. observes that baptism is not to be considered 
 doubtful on this ground, only that the heretic (as he does not 
 believe that sins are remitted through baptism,) does not con- 
 fer it for the remission of sins, and thus his intention might 
 appear doubtful : for St. Pius V. decreed that for such a rea- 
 son persons baptized by Calvinists, were by no means to be 
 rebaptized. Braunman rightly observes, that the priest should 
 attempt nothing in relation to persons baptized by heretics, 
 until the opinion of the bishop has been ascertained." (No. 
 37.) 
 
 In case of necessity, baptism may be administered any- 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 887 
 
 where ; but when there is no necessity, it is not proper to 
 baptize anywhere but in a church which has a baptismal 
 font. The children of kings and princes are excepted ; these 
 may be baptized in their private chapels. By princes are 
 meant those nobles who have the supreme power of the state, 
 and are not under the jurisdiction of any king or prince ; 
 whether they are called princes, or dukes, or marquises, &c. 
 Inferior nobles may not enjoy this privilege, and consequently 
 the priest may not acquiesce in their request, if they ask that 
 their children may be solemnly baptized at home, but he 
 must send them to the bishop or archpresbyter, to bring a 
 written license. (No, 38.) 
 
 The Ceremonies of baptism must be duly observed in its 
 solemn administration, and are always to be performed, ex- 
 cept in a case of necessity. The omission of the ceremonies 
 in an ordinary case is a grievous offence ? These ceremo- 
 nies are divided, for the sake of distinction, into general and 
 particular. The latter may be divided into ceremonies 
 antecedent, concomitant^ and subsequent. 
 
 " The general ceremonies are five, to wit, the solemn bene- 
 diction of the font, as it is prescribed in the missal; the 
 place; the time; the godfather, and the giving of the name. 
 Concerning this conferring of the name, the 2d provincial 
 Synod of Mechlin resolved, 'that the priests take care as 
 much as possible that the names of Gentiles, or others that 
 are profane, be not given to children.' And our pastorale : 
 'But the priest will take care that the name of some saint be 
 always given to the person to be baptized, by whose example 
 he may be excited to live piously, and by whose patronage 
 he maybe assisted.' Authors observe that the name of some 
 saint of the New Testament is more properly given than of 
 the Old ; also rather one than many. 
 
 " The particular ceremonies preceding baptism, which are 
 performed before the entrance of the baptismal font, among 
 various others, are principally four : viz., exorcism, the sign 
 of the cross, the tasting of salt, and the anointing of spittle. 
 The concomitant, which are performed after entering the 
 baptistry, are also principally four : viz., renunciation, the 
 anointing of the cnndidate for baptism with oil of catechu- 
 mens, the catechism, and the inquiry of the desire of re- 
 ceiving baptism. The subsequent, which are performed 
 
888 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 after the sacrament has been finished, are chiefly these three : 
 the anointing of the baptized person with chrism, the dona- 
 tion of a white garment, and the delivery of a hurningwax 
 candle. There were formerly certain special- ceremonies, 
 which concerned the state of the catechumens, &c." (No. 40.) 
 
 Sponsors are to be employed only in a solemn baptism, 
 and then the obligation is imperative and important. The 
 Council of Trent has fixed the number at two, one a man, 
 and the other a woman. The first eflfect is a spiritual rela- 
 tionship ; the second effect is a serious obligation of providing 
 that the baptized person be duly instructed and educated in 
 the Christian faith and life. The qualifications of a sponsor, 
 are the following. He must be baptized ; he must not be an 
 idiot; he must be designated by the parents or others on 
 whom the care devolves of having the infant baptized; or in 
 defect of these, by the pastor, to whom it pertains to admit 
 the designated sponsor, or for a just cause to reject him, &c. 
 The priest commits a grievous sin if he admits more than 
 two sponsors. (No. 41.) 
 
 Whether a Catholic may be a sponsor for a child that is 
 to be baptized among heretics, is a controverted point. " But 
 It is certain that in the baptism of Catholics, the priest ought 
 rather to baptize solemnly without sponsor than with a he- 
 retic, because of two evils the less is to be chosen." (No. 42.) 
 
 Every priest must keep a baptismal register, in which the 
 names and surnames of persons baptized, of the parents, and 
 of the godfathers and godmothers, and the day of the bap- 
 tism, are carefully written down. It is a grievous sin to ne- 
 glect this duty. (No. 43.) 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 389 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVI. 
 
 Treatise concerning the Sacrament of Confirma- 
 tion. 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 Decree of the Council of Florence for the instruction of the 
 Armenians. 
 
 " The second sacrament is Confirmation, the matter of which is 
 chrism prepared from oil, which signifies clearness of conscience, and 
 from balsam, blessed by the bishop, which signifies the odour of a good 
 reputation. But the form is : I sign thee with the sign of the cross^ 
 and I confirm thee loith the chrism of salvation^ in the name of the 
 Father^ and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 " The ordinary minister is the bishop. And whilst a mere priest 
 has power to apply other unctions, none but the bishop ought to confer 
 this ; because we read of the apostles only, whose room the bishops 
 hold, that by the imposition of hands they gave the Holy Spirit, as the 
 reading of Acts viii. 14, manifests. But in place of this imposition of 
 hands, confirmation is given in the church. It is recorded, however, 
 that sometimes by the dispensation of the Apostolic See, from a reason- 
 able and urgent cause, even a simple priest has administered the sa- 
 crament of confirmation, with chrism prepared by the bishop. But the 
 effect of this sacrament is the increase of strength, because in it the 
 Holy Spirit is given, just as it was imparted to the apostles on the day 
 of Pentecost, to wit, in order that a Christian may boldly confess the 
 name of Christ. And therefore the person to be confirmed is anointed 
 on the forehead, where the seat of bashfulness is, that he may not blush 
 to confess the name of Christ, and especially his cross, which to the 
 Jews indeed is a stumbling-block, and to the Gentiles, foolishness, ac- 
 cording to the apostle, 1 Cor. i., for which reason he is signed with the 
 sign of the cross." 
 
 Canons of the Council of Trent concerning Confirmation, 
 " 1. Whoever shall say that the confirmation of baptized persons is 
 a needless ceremony, and not rather a true and proper sacrament ; or 
 that anciently it was nothing else than a kind of catechising, by which 
 33 
 
890 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 the youth expressed the reason of their faith before the Church ; let 
 him be accursed ! 
 
 " 2. Whoever shall say that they do despite to the Holy Spirit, who 
 attribute any virtue to the holy chrism of confirmation ; let him be 
 accursed ! 
 
 "3. Whoever shall say that the ordinary minister of holy confirma- 
 tion is not the bishop alone, but any mere priest whatsoever ; let bira 
 be accursed ! 
 
 This sacrament is called confirmation from its effect, in- 
 asmuch as by it spiritual strength is conferred. It was an- 
 ciently called the sacrament of chrism^ or the sacrament of 
 unction, " also, the seal, or the little sign, both because 
 when the chrism is applied we are sealed on the forehead by 
 the sign of the cross, and because through the character a 
 seal is impressed on the soul." It is also termed perfection, 
 consummation, and plenitude of grace, because in it is spe- 
 cially conferred the Holy Spirit, or the copious grace of the 
 Holy Spirit. For the special benefit and edification of here- 
 tics, it is defined : A sacrament instituted by Christ the 
 Lord, by which the Holy Spirit is given to baptized per- 
 sons, in order that they may steadfastly and boldly profess 
 the faith of Christ. (No. 1.) 
 
 It is a matter of faith that confirmation is a sacrament. 
 "It is proved 1. from sacred scripture. Acts viii. 14, &c. 
 * When the apostles had heard — that Samaria had received 
 the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John. Then 
 they laid hands upon them, and they received the Holy 
 Ghost.' The same is maintained ch. xix. 6, * And when Paul 
 had imposed his hands on them, the Holy Ghost came upon 
 them, and they spoke tongues, and prophesied.' " 
 
 Tradition and the practice of the Church also prove it. A 
 reference is also made to Matt. xix. 15, and 2 Cor. i. 21, 22; 
 but these latter proof texts are not insisted upon as positive. 
 The remote matter of this sacrament is chrism, prepared 
 from oil and balsam, blessed by the bishop. Whether this 
 mixture is essential to the validity of the sacrament is a con- 
 troverted point ; and so is the question whether the blessing 
 or consecration of the chrism is requisite in order to its va- 
 lidity. It is also a disputed point whether the priest ought 
 not to be permitted to consecrate the chrism, as well as the 
 bishop. The proximate matter is the total and adequate 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 391 
 
 application of the chrism, or the anointing of chrism, and the 
 imposition of hands. This application must be made on the 
 forehead and in the form of a cross. The sacrament is 
 valid " whether this anointing be performed with the thumb 
 of the right hand, (as the pontifical manual prescribes,) or 
 with another finger of the right or left hand :" but it is es- 
 sential that it be made with the hand, and not with a rod, or 
 any other instrument, as it ought to be done by imposition 
 of hands. (No. 5.) 
 
 The form is among the Latins, I sign thee with the sign 
 of the cross^ and I confirm thee with the chrism of salva- 
 tion, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
 Holy Ghost. (No. 6.) 
 
 The proper minister is the bishop. (No. 7.) 
 
 According to modern usage, the age at which confirmation 
 is regularly conferred, is not less than seven years ; there 
 are exceptions in which it may be performed even earlier. 
 Idiots are to be confirmed, " because they are capable of 
 character, and of sanctifying, and even of sacramental grace, 
 &c." (No. 8.) 
 
 As for the dispositions requisite for a person who is to be 
 confirmed, a state of grace is necessary in an adult. Chil- 
 dren, although not seven years old, should be previously dis- 
 posed to confession ; instruction, reverence, and devotion 
 suited to their age, are also required. As for the corporeal 
 preparation, observe, 1. When it can conveniently be done, 
 it is more proper that it be given and received fasting. 2. That 
 the persons to be confirmed have the forehead open and 
 clean. 3. That the dress, especially of the girls, be decent 
 and modest. 4. That each one of the persons to be con- 
 firmed have a ribbon, or a linen band, clean, and of proper 
 size, with which the forehead, when anointed with the chrism, 
 may be covered, and may remain bound, out of reverence to 
 the sacred chrism : if however any one at a more advanced 
 age is confirmed, the band may soon be laid aside by the 
 priest, before the confirmed person goes out of the church. 
 (No. 9.) 
 
 The effects of this sacrament are, I. Sanctifying grace, 
 by which the person is strengthened, having annexed the 
 abundance of the virtues and of the seven gifts of the Holy 
 Spirit, of which Is. xi. 2, 3 ; the virtues of faith and boldness 
 
392 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 are specially augmented. 2. Sacramental grace, or actual 
 grace dispensed whenever opportunity is afforded of strenu- 
 ously and boldly professing the faith with heart and mouth. 
 3. The third effect is character, by reason of which this sa- 
 crament can never be repeated. (No. 10.) 
 
 Whether confirmation is necessary to salvation is a dis- 
 puted point, but the more probable opinion is the affirmative. 
 (No. 11.) 
 
 A sponsor is to be employed in confirmation. " Just as a 
 sponsor in baptism contracts the obligation of instructing the 
 baptized person in the faith and in Christian morals ; so the 
 person holding the confirmand in confirmation like a veteran 
 soldier, should instruct the confirmed person, as yet a novice, 
 more perfectly in the Christian warfare." (No. 12.) 
 
 The principal ceremonies of confirmation are the following : 
 
 " So soon as the bishop has pronounced the form of the 
 sacrament, he inflicts a slight blow on the jaw of the con- 
 firmed person : ' in order that he may remember that it be- 
 hoves him as a brave combatant to be always ready to bear 
 with an indomitable spirit, all adversity for the name of 
 Christ,' says the Roman Catechism, num. 20, on confirma- 
 tion. 
 
 " At the same time the bishop prays for peace, saying : 
 Peace be with thee (Pax tecum) : * in order that (says the 
 Roman Catechism,) by this peace the confirmed may under- 
 stand that he has obtained the plenitude of celestial grace, 
 and the peace which passes all understanding.' 
 
 *' These things having been performed by the bishop, the 
 forehead of the confirmed is bound with a band or linen rib- 
 bon, both out of reverence for the sacred chrism, and in 
 order to designate, that the grace of the Holy Spirit just ob- 
 tained is to be diligently preserved, and also, (says the 
 Mechlinian pastorale,) as the symbol of a mind prepared for 
 all reproach and adversity for the name of Christ, whose face 
 was veiled and smitten with blows. 
 
 " Anciently the ribbon was kept tied for seven days ; af- 
 terwards, in some churches, for only three days ; but now it 
 is usually laid aside on the following day, and the forehead 
 is wiped off on the same day : concerning which the Mech- 
 linian pastorale thus directs : * Let the ribbon be laid aside 
 by the priest, and preserved in the sacristy or some other 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 393 
 
 proper place, to be burned to sacred ashes on the day of 
 ashes in Lent.' 
 
 " All being now confirmed, the bishop prays over all at 
 once, that God would confirm the grace received, by perfect- 
 ing it in them. Finally, he bestows upon them the benedic- 
 tion, before which no one of the confirmed may depart, &c. 
 And likewise, all are to be present, at all the ceremonies, 
 from the commencement^" &c. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVII. 
 
 Treatise concerning the Adorable Sacrament op 
 THE Eucharist. 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 Decree of the Council of Florence for the instruction of the 
 Armenians. 
 
 "The third is the Sacrament of the Eucharist, the matter of which is 
 wheaten bread, and wine from the vine, with which, before the conse- 
 cration, a very small quantity of water should be mixed. But water 
 is thus mixed, since it is believed that the Lord himself instituted this 
 sacrament in wine mixed with water ; besides because this agrees with 
 the representation of our Lord's passion : because it is recorded that 
 blood and water flowed forth from the side of Christ : and also because 
 this is proper to signify the effect of this sacrament, which is the union 
 of Christian people with Christ : for water signifies the people, accord- 
 ing to Revel, xvii. 1 5. And he said to me, the waters which thou sawest^ 
 where the harlot sitteth, are peoples, and nations, and tongues, 
 
 " The form of this sacrament are the words of the Saviour, by which 
 this sacrament is performed : for the priest, speaking in the person of 
 Christ, performs this sacrament : for by virtue of the words themselves, 
 the substance of the bread is converted into the body, and the substance 
 of the wine into the blood, of. Christ ; yet so that Christ is contained 
 entire under the form of bread, and entire under the form of wine : 
 33* 
 
394 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 Christ is entire also under every part of the consecrated host, and of 
 the consecrated wine, after a separation has been made. The effect of 
 this sacrament which it produces in the soul of a worthy partaker, is 
 the union of the person to Christ," &c. 
 
 Canons of the Council of Trent concerning the Most Holy Sacrament 
 of the Eucharist. 
 
 " 1. Whoever shall deny that in the sacrament of the Most Holy 
 Eucharist are contained truly, really, and substantially the body and 
 blood, together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 and therefore the entire Christ ; but shall say that he is in it only as in 
 a sign, or figure, or virtue ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 2. Whoever shalt say that in the most holy sacrament of the Eu- 
 charist, the substance of bread and wine remains together with the 
 body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ ; and shall deny that wonder- 
 ful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into 
 the body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the blood, only 
 the forms of bread and wine remaining : which conversion indeed, the 
 Catholic Church most aptly calls transubsta;ntiation ; let him be ac- 
 cursed ! 
 
 " 3. Whoever shall deny that in the adorable sacrament of the Eu- 
 charist, the entire Christ is contained under each kind and under the 
 single parts of each kind, when a separation is made ; let him be ac- 
 cursed ! 
 
 " 4. Whoever shall say that the body and blood of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ are not present in the admirable Eucharist so soon as the con- 
 secration is performed, but only in the use when it is received, and 
 neither before nor after ; and that the true body of our Lord does not 
 remain in the hosts, or consecrated morsels, which are reserved or left 
 after the communion ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 5. Whoever shall say either that remission of sins is the principal 
 fruit of the most holy Eucharist, or that no other effects proceed from 
 it ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 6. Whoever shall affirm that in the holy sacrament of tlie Eucha- 
 rist, Christ the only-begotten Son of God, is not to be adored even with 
 the external worship of latria ; and therefore that the Eucharist is to be 
 honoured neither with peculiar festive celebration, nor to be solemnly 
 carried about in processions according to the laudable and universal 
 rite and custom of the Church, or that it is not to be held up publicly 
 before the people that it may be adored, and that its worshippers are 
 idolaters ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 7. Whoever shall say that it is not lawful that the holy Eucharist 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 395 
 
 he reserved in the sacristy, but that it must necessarily be distributed to 
 those who are present immediately after the consecration ; or that it is 
 not proper that it be carried in procession to the sick ; let him be ac- 
 cursed ! 
 
 " 8. Whoever shall say that Christ as exhibited in the Eucharist, is 
 eaten only spiritually, and not also sacramentally and really ; let him 
 be accursed ! 
 
 " 9. Whoever shall deny that each and every one of Christ's faithful 
 of both sexes, when they have attained to years of discretion, are 
 obliged at least once every year, at Easter, to commune according to 
 the precept of holy mother Church ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 10. Whoever shall say that it is not lawful for the officiating 
 priest to administer the communion to himself; let him be accursed ! 
 
 "11. Whoever shall affirm that faith alone is a sufficient prepara- 
 tion for taking the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist; let him be 
 accursed ! And lest so great a sacrament be taken unworthily, and 
 therefore to death and condemnation, the said holy synod doth decree 
 and declare, that sacramental confession must necessarily precede in 
 the case of those whom conscience accuses of mortal sin, if a confessor 
 is at hand, however contrite they may suppose themselves to be. But 
 if any one shall presume to teach, preach, or pertinaciously assert, or 
 in publicly disputing, to defend the contrary, let him by this very act 
 be excommunicated.'* 
 
 Canons of the same Council concerning the communion of children^ 
 and in both kinds: 
 
 " 1. Whoever shall say that each and every one of Christ's faithful 
 ought to take both kinds of the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist, 
 by the command of God, or because necessary to salvation; let him be 
 accursed ! 
 
 " 2. Whoever shall say that the holy Catholic Church has not been 
 induced by just causes and reasons, to administer the communion to 
 the laity, and also to the clergy not officiating, only under the form of 
 bread ; or that she has erred in this ; let him be accursed 1 
 
 " 3. Whoever shall deny that the whole and entire Christ, the fountain 
 and author of all graces, is received under the one form of bread, be 
 cause as some falsely assert, he is not received under both kinds, ac 
 cording to the institution of Christ ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 4. Whoever shall say that the communion of the Eucharist is ne- 
 cessary for little children before they have attained to years of discre 
 tion ; let him be accursed !" &c. 
 
396 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 As this Sacrament has reference to the present, past, and 
 future, its names are applied with reference to these rela- 
 tions. In respect to the past, inasmuch as it is commemo- 
 rative of the Lord's passion, it is called a sacrifice, also the 
 host, " As it signifies something present, or is a demonstrative 
 sign* of the ecclesiastical unity by which we are specially 
 united to Christ, it is called the communion. Inasmuch as 
 it designates something future, or is a prognostic sign of the 
 enjoyment of God in the heavenly country, it is called the 
 viaticum] because here he affords us a way of arriving 
 there : and so also it is called the eucharist, that is good 
 grace : or because it really contains Christ, who is the foun- 
 tain of grace : or also according to others, because Christ in 
 , the institution of this sacrament gave thanks and is still daily 
 offered in giving thanks to God. It is also Ccdled bread, 
 generally with the addition of eternal life, of angels, &c.; 
 or the body of Christ, the body of the Lord ; also, the sacred 
 feast, the table of the Lord: ^^the supper, because it was 
 instituted in the last supper : but because the heretics abuse 
 this name that they may persuade that the sacrament con- 
 sists in the use or the act of supping, and that fasting may 
 not be enjoined at its reception, therefore, this name is to be 
 seldom used." (No. 1.) 
 
 The sacrament of the Eucharist is usually defined ; " a 
 sacrament instituted by Christ the Lord, which under the 
 consecrated forms of bread and wine, contains the body 
 and blood of Christ, for the spiritual refreshment of man" 
 It differs from the other sacraments, principally in two re- 
 spects : 
 
 " 1. Because it consists in a permanent thing, the other 
 sacraments being only a transient action. 
 
 "2. Because the Eucharist contains Christ himself, the 
 author of all holiness, and the fountain of all grace, truly, 
 really, and substantially ; but the other sacraments have 
 only a certain instrumental virtue imparted by Christ. And 
 hence this sacrament is far more important than the rest, is 
 called b)'- more distinguished names, and is termed antono- 
 mastically the sacrament.'''' (No. 3.) 
 
 The matter to be consecrated should be morally so present 
 that it may be perceptibly designated by the pronoun hoc 
 and hie : and this is requisite for the validity of the con- 
 
• CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 397 
 
 secration, the demonstrative words of which would otherwise 
 not be verified. Hence we may infer that matter placed 
 behind the priest's back, a host lying under a napkin, under 
 the bottom of the cup, is not consecrated in a valid man- 
 ner. It is not necessary, however, that the matter be seen 
 or touched, or that it should be, as it were, struck by the sound 
 of the words, but it is sufficient that it is demonstrable by the 
 pronoun hoc and hie, {this,) either in itself or in something else 
 which contains it. Thus, hosts lying in a heap one on top 
 of the other are duly consecrated, or if they are shut up in a 
 case or pixis ; according to the rubrics however, the pixis con- 
 taining the hosts to be consecrated, ought to be open when 
 the ceremony is performed. The practice of some unman- 
 nerly priests, who put their mouth too near, and as it were 
 breathe upon the cup and the bread, is reproved ; the rubrics 
 prescribe merely that in the consecration, the priest stand 
 with his head bowed, and that he pronounce the words dis- 
 tinctly, secretly, and reverently. 
 
 " Should any priest having before him eleven hosts intend 
 to consecrate only ten, not determining which ten were meant, 
 the consecration is invalid. Not so, however, if thinking 
 there were but ten, he wished to consecrate all which he had 
 before him : — and therefore, every priest ought always to 
 have the intention of consecrating all the hosts which he has 
 before him. On account of this intention, if the priest with- 
 out knowing it has in his hands two greater hosts, they are 
 both consecrated, and in such a case the Roman missal pre- 
 scribes that both must be taken. Hosts placed upon the 
 altar altogether without the knowledge of the priest are not 
 consecrated : for the will is not exercised on any thing un- 
 known. The case is different however if the priest himself, 
 or any one else by his direction, or with his observation, has 
 brought them to the altar to be consecrated : although at the 
 time of consecration he may not have thought of them : 
 because the virtual intention remains ; only at the time of 
 consecration the hosts should be placed in such a way and 
 place as that in which hosts are usually deposited, which are 
 to be consecrated. When the cup has been consecrated, the 
 drops of wine adhering to the outside of the cup, are not 
 consecrated, supposing that the ordinary intention has been 
 afforded: and hence such drops may without scruple be 
 
398 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. • 
 
 wiped off even after the consecration. Opinions vary, how- 
 ever, concerning the drops adhering to the cup inside, or 
 within the vessel, and separated from the whole : and there- 
 fore let the priest be careful to wipe them off before the 
 oblation or consecration : after the consecration, they may 
 not be wiped off because they have then perhaps been con- 
 secrated," &c. (No. 11.) 
 
 The kind of bread proper for consecration is wheat bread 
 only, truly and properly so called. And the water used in 
 kneading the flour should be natural; the Roman missal 
 considers it doubtful whether the sacrament is performed 
 when the bread is made of rose-water or any other distilla- 
 tion. (No. 13.) 
 
 Whether the bread is leavened or unleavened does not 
 affect the essence or validity of the sacrament. The Greek 
 church uses leavened bread, the Roman unleavened. But 
 each must scrupulously observe the custom peculiar to it. 
 
 The kind of wine is the fruit of the vine and that only 
 which is properly wine, and is simply so called ; whether 
 white or red, French or Spanish ; or the wine miraculously 
 produced, such as that was in Cana of Galilee. Insufficient 
 matter are artificial wines made out of grain, apples, pears, 
 or other fruits ; also vinegar prepared from wine and ver- 
 juice or the liquor prepared out of unripe grapes, &c. Must, 
 or wine recently pressed out of grapes, is indeed matter suf- 
 ficient, but it is not lawful to perform the celebration with it 
 on account of its impurity, except in a case of necessity. 
 Whether congealed wine may be used or not is a disputed 
 point ; the probable opinion is that it may be. The respect 
 due to so great a mystery requires that the priests and others 
 whose business it is should be very careful with respect to 
 the adulterations of the wine, and also of the bread. The 
 custom of some, who contract with the merchant, who will 
 furnish the wine for the Eucharist at the lowest rate, is 
 severely reprimanded, for the obvious reason that in order 
 to make profit or at least not lose on his contract, he will be 
 apt to furnish the vilest wines. (No. 15.) 
 
 Water is to be mixed with the wine, but it is not essen- 
 tial to the validity of the sacrament. But now the question 
 arises, what becomes of this water in the consecration 7 There 
 are three opinions mentioned by Innocent III. The first is 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 399 
 
 that this water is turned into the water, which flowed from 
 the side of Christ ; but this is rejected as improbable. The 
 second is that the water is not changed into the blood of 
 Christ, and this opinion also is scarcely probable. The 
 third is that it is changed into the blood of Christ ; and this 
 may be held as certain. But there is a greater controversy 
 whether this water is immediately converted into the blood 
 of Christ ; or whether it is first converted into wine, and thus 
 mediately into the blood of Christ. The latter is evidently 
 the orthodox view. (No. 16.) 
 
 The form of administering the Eucharist in general, is. 
 Take, and eat, this is my body. Observe that it is not suf- 
 ficient to pronounce the words of consecration in a narrative 
 style, but it is necessary to pronounce them by way of asser- 
 tion : for the priest does not merely narrate that Christ by 
 these words changed the bread and wine into his body and 
 blood, but he himself also as a secondary minister effects this 
 change. According to St. Thomas, the words of consecra- 
 tion take effect at the end of the sentence of consecration, or 
 in the last instant of pronouncing the words, hoc est corpus 
 meum, " this is my body," which is the usual form of con- 
 secrating the bread. Daelman affirms that the consecration 
 would not be valid, if in place of hoc, illud, or istud should 
 be used. (Both these words mean this.) Sylvius and some 
 others admit the fact with respect to illud, but not to istud. 
 If hic, here, should be said instead of hoc, the consecration 
 would unquestionably be invalid. But if a priest through 
 ignorance or carelessness should say hic in the masculine 
 instead of hoc, the consecration would be valid, because 
 though he would sin against latinity, yet he would not imply 
 a sense substantially different from that, which the words 
 have when properly pronounced. 
 
 " The word corpus is taken properly and strictly, as it is 
 distinguished from blood, comprehending flesh, bones, nerves, 
 &c., and hence if instead of the word corpus, (body) caro, 
 (flesh) should be said, the consecration would not be valid ; 
 so also if the priest should say this is the body of Christ, 
 hoc est corpus Christi. (Nos. 17, and 18.) 
 
 The usual form of consecrating the cup is this ; 
 
 " For this is the cup of my blood of the new and eternal 
 testament, the mystery of faith, which shall be shed for you 
 
400 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 and for many for the remission of sins." The only essen- 
 tial words in this form are " this is the cup of my blood.'* 
 (No. 19.) 
 
 The real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. 
 
 "The Catholic dogma concerning the real presence of 
 Christ in the Eucharist, up to this time, steadfast and un- 
 doubted among the faithful, Berengarius, the Archdeacon 
 &c., in the XI. cent., first openly denied, asserting that the 
 Eucharist is the mere sign of the body of Christ. This 
 heresy, however, was assailed by most learned men and 
 condemned in various councils : and although Berengarius 
 several times relapsed, yet many attest that he still died, 
 penitent and a catholic. The Albigenses and Wiclif followed 
 Berengarius, and Wiclif taught that the substance of the 
 material wine and of the material bread remain in the sacra- 
 ment of the altar. 
 
 " In the XVI. cent., Carlostadt, Zuinglius, Bucer, Calvin, 
 and after him the Calvinists likewise taught that the Eucha- 
 rist is the mere and naked figure of Christ's body. Against 
 whom the Council of Trent thus defined, Sess. 13., Can. 1. 
 (See preface to this chap.) 
 
 ^^ Luther would gladly have denied this truth, but in his 
 letter to the Argentines, he confesses himself convinced by 
 the most evident testimonies of Scripture. Declaring war 
 however, upon the Roman Church, he maintained the im- 
 panation or that the substance of the bread and wine remains 
 with the body and blood of Christ. Another error of Luther 
 is, that Christ is not present in the Eucharist except in the 
 act of receiving it, &c." 
 
 " From which it is moreover inferred that Christ must be 
 adored in this sacrament with the worship which is due to 
 God, as the council of Trent teaches. This Calvin and the 
 Calvinists simply deny. The adoration to Luther, however, 
 appeared at first a thing indiflferent ; afterwards also useful 
 and necessary : but of the modern Lutherans some admit 
 the adoration in receiving ; others do not admit it, even in the 
 reception." (No. 20.) 
 
 The real presence is proved from John chap. vi. " It 
 is to be premised, that three parts are distinguished in the 
 chapter above cited. In the first as far as v. 25, the question 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 401 
 
 is concerning material food, or the multiplication of the five 
 loaves, with which Christ fed the five thousand people. In 
 the second, the question is as far as v. 52, concerning food 
 purely spiritual., namely faith in the incarnate Messiah. 
 But in the third part from v. 52, to the end of the chapter, 
 the question is concerning the real and sacramental eating 
 of the flesh of Christ. Having premised these things, this 
 last is proved. 
 
 " Because Christ promising this sacrament says, v. 52 : 
 the bread which I will give is my flesh for the life of the 
 world ; signifying that his own flesh was truly to be given 
 by way of food, not only in the sign and figure : because v. 
 69, he places it in opposition to the manna, which was the 
 figure of this sacrament. He designates also that his flesh 
 was to be really given, and not only by faith : because he is 
 speaking of a thing not yet done, but future : but the spiri- 
 tual eating through faith both existed then, and also had 
 existed under the old law : nor otherwise, v. 56, ought he to 
 have distinguished between spiritual meat and drink. Like- 
 wise he does not signify that his own flesh was to be given 
 only by its virtue and energy, but substantially, as is gathered 
 from the circumstance that the Jews disputing about these 
 words said v. 53 : How can this man give us his own flesh to 
 eat ? To whom Christ said, v. 54 : Unless you eat the flesh 
 of t'he Son of man, (S^c. : and on this account still more of- 
 fended, they said, v. 61, This saying is hard, &c., which 
 however, he still confirmed, v. 63, by the testimony of the 
 future ascension of his body: and when, v. 67 : many of his 
 disciples went back, he did not correct their interpretation ; 
 which the infinite goodness of the excellent master, seemed 
 in accordance with his custom to require, if he had meant 
 those words concerning the spiritual eating alone : and what 
 is more he asked his apostles, whether they too would go 
 away, unless he should remit something from the severity of 
 the truth. 
 
 " Ohj. Christ himself explains his promise as referring to 
 a spiritual eating, saying, v. 64, It is the Spirit that qmck- 
 neth : the flesh proflteth nothing. The ivords that I have 
 spoken to you are spirit and life. 
 
 " Ans. Christ does not correct their interpretation con- 
 cerning his real presence in the Eucharist, but only the 
 34 
 
402 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 carnal mode of interpretation, according to that remark of 
 St. Aug. Treatise 27, upon John. * The flesh profiteth no- 
 thing' : but how did they interpret ? They understood such 
 as is cut up in a carcase, or is sold in the shambles. See 
 authors more at large." (No. 21.) 
 
 The argument contained in this chapter is certainly con- 
 clusive. Of course the disciples mws^ have understood our 
 Lord to be speaking of the Eucharist, although it was an 
 institution of which they had previously known absolutely 
 nothing, and the nature of which they could not possibly 
 understand, because they were not prepared even to receive 
 the doctrine of his death. The passage from Augustine 
 explanatory of the words, which at first sight do seem to 
 favour the spiritual interpretation somewhat, gives the cotq) 
 de grace to the heretical argument, and decides this vexa- 
 tious controversy. 
 
 But the vindication is not yet complete, as the following 
 remarks will show ; though we do think it is ungenerous to 
 press the point so strenuously, after the unanswerable argu- 
 ment already advanced. 
 
 The same doctrine is proved from the words of the in- 
 stitution. 
 
 " 1. For the words : This is my body : this is my blood ; 
 related by the three evangelists, Matthew, Mark and Luke, 
 and by the Apostles, 1 Cor. xi., are most plain, and under- 
 stood in their proper, natural and obvious sense, import the 
 real presence of the body and blood under the forms of bread 
 and wine : but the words ought to be thus understood, and 
 not improperly and figuratively. 
 
 " This is proved, 1. From the most correct rule of inter- 
 preting Sacred Scripture, which St. Aug. gives, Bk. 3, de 
 Doct. Christ, ch. 10, to wit, that the words of Scripture are 
 to be understood in their proper and natural sense so often as 
 they contain nothing which may not be referred to propriety 
 of morals, or to the truth of faith, or so often as there is no 
 obstacle to the contrary ; therefore, &c. 
 
 " 2. From the circumstances, which all conspire towards the 
 proper and natural sense : for Christ framed a testament. 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMEN'tS. 403 
 
 instituted a sacrament, sanctioned a law according to that 
 passage in Luke : Do this in remembrance of me ; he deHv- 
 ered a peculiar doctrine, and addressed his friends when 
 death was immediately at hand : but all these things are 
 done usually by the proper, natural and obvious mode of 
 speech, not in a metaphorical or figurative style; there- 
 fore, &c. 
 
 *' 3. These words were spoken to those, to whom (as it is 
 said, Luke viii. 10,) it is given to know the mystery of the 
 kingdom of God, but to the rest in parables: which Christ 
 was accustomed privately to explain to the disciples : but 
 that this was done in this instance is no where recorded. 
 
 " 4. The things which the Apostle adds concerning one 
 who receives the sacrament unworthily, necessarily evinces 
 more than the figure of Christ's body and blood : He shall 
 be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord : also : He 
 who eats and drinks unworthy, eats and drinks judgment 
 to himself not discerning the Lord^s body. 
 
 " The heretics object that in the words of the form, the 
 word is may be taken improperly for signifies :■ just in the 
 same way as Luke viii. 11, the seed, is the word of God ; 
 John XV. 1, I am the true vine ; 1 Cor. x. 4, But this rock 
 was Christ; Gen. xli. 26, The seven fat oxen, and the 
 seven full ears are seven years of plenty. 
 
 " Ans. It is true that in many passages of Scripture, the 
 word is may be understood improperly and figuratively : but 
 then this is evidjently gathered from the circumstance for 
 instance of a dream, a parable, &c. ; as may be seen among 
 interpreters and others in respect to this : but in this case no 
 circumstances denote the same, but all imply rather the con- 
 trary, as is plain from the remarks already made. Some 
 heretics place the metaphor on the words body and blood ; 
 but this may easily be refuted from the fact that the Apostle, 
 1 Cor. xi. 24, subjoins to those words : This is my body : 
 which shall be delivered for you ; and Matthew and Mark 
 to the words, This is my blood, add : which shall be shed 
 for many. (No. 22.) 
 
 ** The same doctrine is proved by tradition. This Bel- 
 larmine, amongst others, clearly proves from the testimony 
 of fathers and councils, which he deduces from the time of 
 the apostles, through every age of the Church. The same 
 
404 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 is moreover incontrovertibly proved, from prescription or 
 continual possession in this way: it is certain that in the 
 XI. cent., in the time of Berengarius, the whole Catholic 
 Church acknowledged the real presence of Christ in the 
 Eucharist : as is plain from the very confession of Beren- 
 garius, and from his condemnation : but no time can be 
 assigned in which this faith was introduced into the Church ; 
 which, however, could be shown, if it had not been intro- 
 duced by the apostles themselves, and by Christ ; because 
 if introduced subsequently, it must have been done either 
 simultaneously or successively : if the former, (which is 
 altogether inconceivable), ^historians would at least mention 
 it as extremely wonderful ; if the latter, this could not be 
 done without perturbation and contradiction, which we 
 should again know from historians ; therefore this is the 
 faith left to the Church by Christ and the apostles, and 
 therefore true. By a similar argument, the other truths of 
 the faith may be demonstrated against the heretics. The 
 Calvinists object chiefly against this last, that such a faith 
 might be successively introduced without opposition or con- 
 tradiction, just as new discipline has frequently been intro- 
 duced in the Church, v. g. about the time of breaking the 
 fast, &c. 
 
 "The reason of faith is one thing, that of discipline is 
 another: the one is immovable, but the other is mutable 
 through change of times and circumstances. Besides new 
 discipline may be introduced, without the old being con- 
 demned ; but a new doctrine of faith implies the falsity of 
 the contrary opinion. At all events, the changes of disci- 
 pline are not so obscure but that they have been designated 
 by historians; and nearly all have occurred not univer- 
 sally, but in certain places. 
 
 "To the arguments already mentioned, must be added 
 that God has confirmed the truth of the real presence, by 
 open and frequent miracles performed at various places and 
 times. These, the heretics indeed are in the habit of vilify- 
 ing, but with no greater right than all credit may be denied 
 to history ; the Jews too explore the miracles of Christ, by 
 ascribing them to the devil, for the most distinguished fathers 
 mention them, as may be seen in Bellarmine, Wiggcrs, &c. ; 
 indeed from the apostle himself, 1 Cor. ii. 30, &c. It would 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 405 
 
 be too tedious to refute all the things which the heterodox 
 have heaped together from the holy fathers ; however, for 
 the understanding of those things which are opposed from 
 the fathers, it is of assistance to note the following rules. 
 
 " First : When some holy fathers call the Eucharist, the 
 figure, image, type, sign, &c., of the body of Christ, these 
 are understood in a manifold and true sense, without detri- 
 ment to the real presence: 1. By reason of the forms of 
 bread and wine, which by the institution of Christ, are a 
 sign, figure, &c., of the body of Christ not absent, but 
 present : 2. Inasmuch as the body of Christ, veiled under 
 the forms, is the sign of himself existing in his proper form, 
 V. g. hanging on the cross, or of his glorified body in hea- 
 ven : 3. Because the Eucharist is sometimes called the 
 sign, &c., of the mystical body, which is the Church. 
 
 " Second: This sacrament, as well in scripture as in the 
 fathers, is often called bread: 1. By reason of the forms 
 which remain : 2. On account of the matter converted into 
 the body of Christ, just as the rod of Aaron, when turned 
 into a serpent, is still called a rod. Ex. vii. 12. Because it 
 is the spiritual bread of the soul. 
 
 " Third : When some say that in the Eucharist there is 
 
 ■ not the same body, which the Son of God assumed from the 
 
 Virgin, in which he suffered death, &c., they only mean 
 
 that it is not the same body as to condition and affections, 
 
 &c., although it is the same as to the substance. 
 
 ^^ Fourth: When some fathers so extol the spiritual eating 
 that they seem not to admit the othej ; they only intend that 
 the external and real does not profit without the spiritual. 
 
 " Fifth : If some fathers, who wrote before these heresies 
 arose, occasionally spoke without sufficient accuracy, this 
 was because they knew that they were understood in a good 
 sense by the faithful, who were afflicted with no doubt. 
 Some also spoke sparingly and somewhat obscurely, because 
 in the first centuries, the more sacred mysteries of religion 
 were hidden from Pagans, Jews and Catechumens ; both 
 because these were incompetent to understand those things, 
 and lest they should deride and profane them. By these 
 rules, all things which heretics propose from the holy fathers, 
 may be answered." (No. 23.) 
 
 " Objections from scripture and reason are solved. 
 '34* 
 
406 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 " OhJ. 1. Christ commanded the Eucharist to be per- 
 formed in remembrance of him (Luke xxii. 19.); but me- 
 mory is only concerning a thing that is absent, not present ; 
 therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. The meaning of the words of Christ, is : Do this 
 in remembrance of my suffering and death : as is plain 
 from the apostle, 1 Cor. xi. 26 ; but the suffering of Christ 
 neither then was, nor is now present. Besides the minor is 
 false in its generality : because the memory of a present 
 thing is possible, especially if it is not visible or sensible. 
 
 " Obj. 2. According to various passages of scripture, 
 Christ is no longer in this world, but has ascended into hea- 
 ven, as Matt. xxvi. 11 ; John xvi. 16 ; and Acts iii. 21. 
 
 " Ans. In these the question is only concerning the visible 
 presence of Christ, but not the invisible or sacramental, 
 which he has in the Eucharist. 
 
 " Heretics object from reason, that our dogma is an im- 
 possible thing, and involving a contradiction, because Christ 
 must be supposed to be bodily present in many places under 
 a little host. 
 
 " Ans. Besides the solution of such objections in detail, 
 (which see in Tournely), the general reply is given, that the 
 prejudice of heretics must be corrected by showing, that the 
 understanding must be captive to the obedience of faith ; 
 for which the following will afford assistance : 
 
 "1. To remember that it is a mystery of faith, and faith 
 is the evidence of things not seen. 2. To allege that there 
 are other mysteries impervious to reason; as that of the 
 most holy Trinity, an3 the incarnation. To reason from 
 the less to the greater in this way : there are very many 
 things in nature which are rather to be admired than ex- 
 plained ; therefore a fortiori in the mysteries of faith. 4. 
 To allege some similar things : v. g. according to theologians, 
 the whole soul is i*n the whole body, and the whole soul is 
 in each part of the body. Christ came forth from the se- 
 pulchre and the womb when closed, changed water into 
 wine, &c., which faith teaches and reason does not explain. 
 5. To declare that the fathers of the church have always 
 acknowledged, that in the Eucharist, there are stupendous 
 miracles and mysteries of inscrutable truth ; and therefore, 
 by such arguments of the heretics, the truth of the Catholic 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 407 
 
 doctrine is not impaired, but is on the contrary, confirmed." 
 (No. 24.) In No. 25, transubstantiation is defined in ac- 
 cordance with the council of Trent, sess. 13. can. 2. "That 
 wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance 
 of the bread into the body, and of the whole substance of 
 the wine into the blood of Christ, only the forms of bread 
 and wine remaining." 
 
 " This word transubstantiation, although it is not found 
 in scripture, is yet rightly consecrated by the church, and 
 employed to the explanation of those truths, which are found 
 in the scriptures and in tradition, and to the exclusion of the 
 heresies opposed to theiiQ ; just as the church has rightly 
 adopted the names, consubstantiality, Trinity, mother of 
 God, &c., because what those words signify, is truly de- 
 rived from tradition and scripture, &c." 
 
 " That when the consecration has been performed, all the 
 accidents of the bread and wine, (or their form) remain, 
 both faith and the senses teach : for the same size, the same 
 colour, the same taste, &c., remain. Thus, however, 
 Christ chose to give his body and his blood in the Eucha- 
 rist, both with regard to the rite and reverence of the mys- 
 tery, and the merit of faith, and to the convenient use of 
 the sacrament." 
 
 " St. Thomas teaches * that these accidents subsist in 
 the sacrament without any subject, by a divine virtue.' 
 (No. 26.) 
 
 " How long does Christ remain in this sacrament ?" 
 Just so long as the forms remain preserved, or so long as 
 they are not corrupted, or until the substance of the bread 
 and wine no longer exists. But how long the forms remain 
 preserved in the stomach or otherwise, is uncertain. " It is 
 very probable, according to Pauwels, that this sacrament 
 confers its effects not only in eating and swallowing, but 
 
 also so LONG AS THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST CONTINUES IN 
 
 THE STOMACH : and consequently, that it is highly praise- 
 worthy to tarry in the temple at least a quarter of an hour, 
 and to stir up one's self in the spirit of devotion and medi- 
 tation, that thus a continual increase of grace may be ac- 
 quired." 
 
 The box in which the hosts are kept, should be cleaned 
 
408 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 from time to time, that the older particles may not adhere 
 to the pixis and spoil. (No. 28.) 
 
 As it belongs to the power of the sacerdotal order to con- 
 secrate, which continues with a character never to be lost ; 
 hence any priest consecrates in a valid manner, although 
 he may be a wicked man, a heretic, suspended, excommu- 
 nicated, degraded, &c. : but every one who is not a priest, 
 does not consecrate in a valid manner. (No. 29.) 
 
 The proper minister for dispensing the Eucharist, is the 
 priest alone, " and indeed by divine right ; and it is inferred 
 from these words of Christ : Do this, &c. That is, conse- 
 crate, take, and distribute to others, as ye see me do." The 
 extraordinary minister is the deacon, with the permission, 
 however, of the bishop or priest ; but this office is not to be 
 entrusted to the sub-deacon, or the other inferior clergy, or 
 to the laity. (No. 30.) 
 
 For the due reception of the Eucharist, baptismal charac- 
 ter and the wish of receiving this sacrament are required ; 
 also a state of grace, when it is a sacrament of the living. 
 Whoever is conscious of mortal sin is under obligation first 
 to make confession. Sufficient instruction and discernment 
 are required, so that the communicant may be able to dis- 
 cern this table from a profane one, this celestial bread from 
 common. Also, a right intention, and devotion befitting this 
 sacrament ; acts of faith, hope, charity, humiliation, and 
 contrition. He must come fasting, and with decent and 
 clean apparel. (No. 31.) In No. 36, the following grave 
 question is discussed. 
 
 Whether the taking of Tobacco breaks the na- 
 tural Fast? 
 
 ^^ Ans. 1. If the question is concerning snuff, it seems 
 sufficiently clear that by it a natural fast is not broken ; be- 
 cause it neither is food or drink, nor is it taken as such ; 
 and although it might be supposed that casually some of it 
 might be passed into the stomach, this is supposed to be done 
 by way of respiration or saliva. 2. By smoking, some say 
 that the fast is broken, from the circumstance that something 
 of the oil is swallowed with the smoke ; but more hold the 
 contrary opinion, because all the smoke is usually admitted 
 through the mouth and nostrils by the smoker (esjieciaily if 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 409 
 
 he is expert) ; and if a small quantity is transmitted, it may 
 be as before. However, if this takes place in a great quan- 
 tity, then, according to others, the fast is broken. 3. The 
 difficulty as to chewing is greater ; however, Pontas and 
 Billuart maintain against Van Roy and others, that by this 
 the fast is not impaired : because it is not designed to be 
 taken inwardly : nor are very many of the more succulent 
 particles of the tobacco taken inwardly, as chewers avoid 
 this very carefully, on account of the acrid and unpleasant 
 taste ; yet if this latter should take place, a natural fast 
 would be broken. Benedict XIV." (my reader has not for- 
 gotten the lucid dissertation of his Holiness on the chocolate 
 question,) " thinks that the fast is not broken by taking 
 snuff, or by smoking, but he determines nothing with respect 
 to chewing. But as it is very indecent that any one should 
 approach the sacred table with his mouth or nostrils smeared 
 with tobacco, and redolent with its stench : therefore, it is 
 proper to abstain from its use, and indeed entirely from 
 smoking and chewing." (No. 36.) Amen ! 
 
 In No. 47, the question is discussed, " When does the 
 Eucharist confer the increase of Grace ? At what instant 
 is the grace conferred? Steyaert and Daelman reply that it 
 is conferred immediately from the commencement of eating; 
 Suarez and Billuart, when the host is passing down through 
 the throat ; but Gonet, when the forms first touch the 
 stomach ; Sylvius, however, replies, that no one can know 
 this, save he who effects it." 
 
 Three things hinder the effect of this sacrament, viz. : 
 want of baptism, want of intention in an adult, and mortal 
 sin. (No. 49.) There is a threefold mode of communing, 
 viz. : merely sacramentally, merely spiritually, and sacra- 
 mentally and spiritually at the same time. He receives the 
 Eucharist sacramentally, who, with the intention of receiv- 
 ing it, really takes it, but without spiritual profit : such a 
 case is, when a person communes who is conscious of mor< 
 tal sin, &c. If a mouse or a dog eats the sacramental forms, 
 it does not receive them sacramentally, though the body of 
 Christ does not cease to be under those forms. They com- 
 mune spiritually, who, desiring it, eat that heavenly bread 
 by a living faith, which operates through delight, and feel its 
 profit and advantage. And they commune sacramentally 
 
410 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 and spiritually who receive the Eucharist really and worthily, 
 and obtain its effects, as the righteous do. (No. 50.) 
 
 No. 63 treats of the punishment for not communing at 
 Easter. A dispensation may be obtained on account of in- 
 disposition, or a peculiar case of conscience ; but " He who 
 without the leave now mentioned, or some other legitimate 
 excuse, shall omit the Easter communion, &c., incurs the 
 punishment that, living, he be driven from the threshold of 
 the church, and dying, be denied Christian burial. This 
 punishment, according to Steyaert, is not the same as ex- 
 communication, but as it were only a part of it, as is evident 
 from the other effects of excommunication." (No. 63.) 
 
 The 65th No. treats of the communion of the sick, and, 
 among the rest, the question is asked, " What if the sick 
 man vomits up the sacred host ? Ans. Conformably to the 
 Roman Missal, if the forms appear whole, they may be re- 
 verently gathered up, and afterwards taken ; but if nausea 
 forbids this, then they must be carefully separated from the 
 filth, and thus they must be laid aside in some sacred place, 
 and after they have become corrupt, they may be put away 
 into the sacristy, or some sacred sink; for so long as they are 
 entire, they cannot be burned without a kind of sacrilege. 
 The same course must be pursued if, by any means what- 
 soever, whether through negligence or for some other cause, 
 the forms should be found to be spoiled." But if the forms 
 have not become corrupt on account of the brief space that 
 has intervened, then the matter thus vomited may be burned, 
 and the ashes put away into some sacred place, v. g. the 
 cemetery. 
 
 ^^Wliat if the sick person dies immediately after having 
 taken the viaticum ? 
 Ans. If the sacred host does not appear in his mouth, 
 then the dead man is to be left thus, although it may not be 
 known whether he has swallowed it ; but if it appear in his 
 mouth, let it be modestly extracted, and reverently kept 
 until the forms are corrupted : and then proceed as has just 
 been said with regard to the vomited host." 
 
 I have refrained from comments on many of the last chapters, be- 
 cause in most instances tliey effectually refute themselves, or are so 
 puerile as to be beneath sober refutation ; but some of the assertions 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 411 
 
 of Peter Dens, on the subject of the Eucharist, are so outrageously 
 false, that a few historical reminiscences appear to be a necessary ap. 
 pendage to this chapter. 
 
 In the first place then, in the face of the impudent assertion of the 
 Romish theologian, that transubstantiation always has been a doctrine 
 of the Church of Christ, we distinctly affirm that it never was regu- 
 larly acknowledged as an article of faith, imposed as absolutely neces- 
 sary to be believed by all the faithful, even in the Church of Rome^ 
 until the Lateran Council, held at Rome, A. D. 1215. That the notion 
 had existed for some centuries before, we admit ; it had either ori- 
 ginated or been harboured in the brain of a monk, at the beginning of 
 the seventh century, and received some countenance from the second 
 Council of Nice, which first sanctioned the worship of images. It was 
 afterwards introduced into the Latin Church, towards the close of the 
 ninth century. Paschasius Rathbertus first reduced this novel doctrine 
 into something like its present shape, and proposed it in the Western 
 Church, where it was most vigorously opposed by Rabanus Maurus, 
 Archbishop of Mentz, who in his Epistle to Heribald, ch. 33, denounces 
 it as an alarming innovation. The contest in which Berengarius was 
 conspicuous, and to which allusion is made by the Romish theologian, 
 occasioned the convention of two synods. For upwards of 300 years, 
 this strange doctrine was opposed by a host of the most learned and 
 pious men of those times ; and as already remarked, was not foisted 
 by ecclesiastical authors upon human credulity, until the 4th Lateran 
 Council, in 1215, and then it was effected in an imperious manner, 
 more by the decision of Pope Innocent III. ex cathedra, than by the 
 general concurrence even of that ignorant and besotted council. The 
 Council of Trent, A. D. 1545, gave it its full and final institution, as 
 an article of faith. 
 
 That this is the true state of the case, can be abundantly sustained. 
 The learned Erasmus says in his annotations on 1 Cor. vii. " It was 
 late ere the Church defined Transubstantiation." And Tonstal de 
 Euch. Lib. 1. " Touching the manner of the real presence how it 
 might be, it had perhaps been better to leave every man that would be 
 curious to his own conjecture, as before the Lateran Council it was 
 LEFT free." 
 
 Scotus, whom the Papists call Doctor SuhtiliSy for the pungency and 
 discrimination of his wit and learning, and who lived about the year 
 1300, says, 4th Bk. of Sentences, Dist. ii. 2, 3. "That which chiefly 
 sways me, is, that we must maintain touching the sacraments, as the 
 holy Church of Rome maintains. But she now holds that the bread 
 
412 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 is transubstantiated into the body, and the wine into the blood : as 
 manifestly appears in the creed of the Lateran Council, under Inno- 
 cent III., which begins with these words : We firmly believe^ Sfc. 
 And if you ask, why should the Church make choice of so difficult a 
 sense of this article, when the words of the Scripture, this is my body, 
 might be explained in a sense more easy, and in appearance more 
 true : I answer, the Scriptures are expounded by the same Spirit that 
 made them ; and so it is to be supposed that the Catholic Church ex- 
 pounded them by the same Spirit whereby she delivered the faith unto 
 us : namely, being taught by the spirit of truth, and therefore she chose 
 this sense, because it was true." 
 
 Surely no one will be disposed, after reading this cunning argument, 
 to question the right of Scotus to the title of Doctor Subtilis ! How- 
 ever, it is nothing new for the most subtle Papist to beg the question ; 
 in fact he can scarcely argue without doing it. 
 
 A singular statute, enacted by Henry VIII., appeared in 1540 ; it 
 was to this effect : 
 
 " That if any person or persons, within the king's dominions, should 
 after the 12th day of July next, by word, writing, imprinting, cypher- 
 ing, or any otherwise, publish, preach, teach, say, affirm, declare, dis- 
 pute, argue, or hold any opinion, that in the blessed sacrament of the 
 Altar, under the form of bread and wine, after the consecration thereof, 
 there is not present really, the natural body and blood of our Saviour 
 Jesus Christ, conceived of the Virgin Mary : or that after the said con- 
 secration, there remaineth any substance of the bread or wine, or any 
 other substance than of Christ, God and man : or that in the flesh, 
 under the form of bread, is not the very blood of Christ : or that with 
 the blood of Christ, under the form of wine, is not the very flesh of 
 Christ, as well apart, as though they were both together : or shall affirm 
 the said sacrament to be of other substance than is above said : that 
 then every such person so offending, their aiders, comforters, counsel- 
 lors, consenters, and abettors therein, shall be deemed and adjudged 
 heretics, and every such offence shall be judged manifest heresy : and 
 that every such offender and offenders shall therefore have and suffer 
 judgment, execution, pain, and pains of death, by way of burning, 
 without any abjuration, benefit of the clergy, or sanctuary to be al- 
 lowed : and also to forfeit to the king, his heirs, and successors, all his 
 or their honours, lands, tenements, goods, chattels, and estates what- 
 soever." 
 
 Streams of innocent Protestant blood have flowed, because men were 
 not prepared to deny the evidence of their own senses, of reason, and 
 
CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 413 
 
 of scripture, by acknowledging the truth of the horrible doctrine of the 
 real presence, than which a more daring and outrageous blasphemy 
 has never been invented by the Prince of hell ! 
 
 The following suggestions may perhaps lead the mind of an honest 
 inquirer, who may be in doubt, to the truth. 
 
 1. We cannot admit the doctrine of transubstantiation to be true, 
 because it overthrows the very nature of a sacrament, which requires 
 a sign, and a thing signified. According to transubstantiation, the 
 bread ceases to be a sign, because it becomes the thing signified, viz., 
 the body of Christ. 
 
 2. From I Cor. xi. 25, and elsewhere, it is manifest that the bread 
 and wine remain, such after the consecration. 
 
 3. To say that the glorified body of Christ, which is in heaven, and 
 shall there remain to the end of time, is daily created in ten thousand 
 different places upon earth, by the hocus pocus of a priest, is the first 
 born of absurdities. 
 
 4. If the substance of the bread and wine does not remain after the 
 consecration, then when poison is mixed in the sacrament, either it is 
 mixed with the mere accidents, (i. e. with the taste, smell, colour, &c.) 
 or with the body of Christ ; both of which are absurd. Now poison 
 has been mixed with the consecrated host, and with the wine, and it 
 has been but too manifest that the substance of the bread and wine 
 has been affected by it. Witness the case of Pope Victor III., who 
 was poisoned by the cup, and that of the Emperor Henry VII., who 
 died in consequence of receiving a poisoned host. 
 
 5. If the bread entirely loses its substance, then it must cease to 
 exist ; for that which has been, but has ceased to be, is of course anni- 
 hilated. Hence it is absurd to speak of the bread and wine being con- 
 verted into the body and blood of Christ, for in every change the matter 
 must remain, otherwise it becomes an exchange, or a substitution, 
 or succession. And therefore, as the substance of the forms does not 
 remain, the body and blood of Christ must be substituted, or must suc- 
 ceed in their place ; and hence it would be far more rational to speak 
 of day being transubstantiated into night, than to maintain the doctrine 
 of the Church of Rome even with her own premises. 
 
 8. Christ says. Do this in remembrance of me. We remember the 
 absent, not the present. Christ instituted the Eucharist as a memo- 
 rial of himself until he should come. 
 
 9. The Saviour says, John xii. 26, Where I am, there shall also my 
 servants be ; that is they shall be with him in his glory. Christ is 
 now Ml his glory, and therefore his saints and servants, who have de- 
 
 35 
 
414 CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 parted this life, are with him. Now when Christ is in the sacrament, 
 or rather when the sacrament becomes Christ, is he in his glory, or is 
 he not ? If he is, then the saints must be there present to see, and be 
 partakers of his glory. For they are ever with him^ 1 Thess. iv. 17, 
 And follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth, Rev. xiv. 4. But if 
 Christ be not in his glory in the Romish Eucharist, then it is sacrilege 
 to deprive him of it, by thus crucifying the Lord afresh, and putting 
 
 HIM TO AN OPEN SHAME ! 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVIII. 
 Treatise concerning the Sacrifice of the Mass. 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 " Hitherto we have treated of the Eucharist, inasmuch as it is a sa- 
 crament, or is ordained to the sanctification of man ; now we must 
 discuss the subject in so far as it is a sacrifice, or as it relates to the 
 worship of God. 
 
 Canons of the Council of Trent concerning the sacrifice of the Mass. 
 
 " 1. Whoever shall say that in the mass there is not offered to God 
 a true and proper sacrifice, or that Christ's being offered is nothing 
 else than his being given to us to be eaten ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 2. Whoever shall say that by these words, Do this in remembrance 
 of me, Christ did not appoint the apostles as priests; or that he did not 
 ordain, that they and other priests should offer his body and blood ; let 
 him be accursed ! 
 
 " 3. Whoever shall say that tlie sacrifice of the mass is merely an 
 offering of praise and thanks, or a simple commemoration of the sacri- 
 fice performed on the cross, and not propitiatory ; or that it is of benefit 
 only to the recipient ; and that it ought not to be offered for the living 
 and the dead, for sins, penances, satisfactions, and other necessities ; 
 let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 4. Whoever shall say that by the mass the most holy sacrifice of 
 Christ, finished upon the cross, is blasphemed, or that the mass is dero* 
 gatory to it ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 ** 5. Whoever shall say that it is an imposture to celebrate masses 
 
CONCERNING THE MASS. 415 
 
 in honour of the saints, and for the purpose of obtaining their interces- 
 sion with God, as the Church intends ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 6. Whoever shall say that the canon of the mass contains errors, 
 and therefore ought to be abrogated ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 7. Whoever shall say that the ceremonies, robes, and external 
 signs which the Catholic Church uses in the celebration of masses are 
 impious vanities rather than offices of piety ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 8. Whoever shall say that the masses, in which the priest alone 
 communes sacramentally, are unlawful, and therefore should be abro- 
 gated ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 9. Whoever shall say that the rite of the Roman Church, by which 
 a part of the canon and the words of consecration are pronounced in a 
 low voice, ought to be condemned ; or that the mass should be cele- 
 brated only in a vernacular tongue ; or that water should not be mixed 
 with the wine in the cup that is to be offered, because it is contrary to 
 the institution of Christ; let him be accursed!" 
 
 " Sacrifice properly and strictly taken, for the sacrificial 
 action of which we here treat, is thus defined : An external 
 oblation, by which any sensible and permanent thing is coU' 
 secrated, slain, or changed by a legitimate minister, as a 
 protestation of the dominion of the Supreme God, over all 
 created things, and of our subjection to him,"*"* (No. 1.) 
 
 " Sacrifice is divided according to the different state of the 
 world, into the sacrifice of the law of nature, of the Mosaical 
 law, and of the new law." 
 
 " By reason of the matter, it is divided into hosts, or vic- 
 tims, when an animal was offered ; into immolations, when 
 the fruits of the earth were offered ; and into libations, when 
 any liquor was offered. On account of the form, or of the 
 various action by which the thing was wont to be changed, 
 it is divided into the holocaust, in which the thing offered 
 was burned entire, so that nothing of it could be em- 
 ployed for human use, and it was the most perfect sacrifice ; 
 into the sin-offering, which was partly burned, and went 
 partly to the use of the priests, who eat of it in the court of 
 the temple ; and the peace-offeHng, which was offered either 
 for returning thanks for benefits received, or for obtaining 
 new ones : this sacrifice was divided into three parts, one of 
 which was burned in honour of God, another was appropri- 
 ated to the use of the priests, and the third to the use of the 
 offerers. On account of its object, it is divided into a reve^ 
 
416 CONCERNING THE MASS. 
 
 rential, propitiatory, or expiatory, a Eucharistical and im- 
 petratorial sacrifice. This division differs but little from the 
 preceding. It is called reverential, because it is directed 
 only to the worship of God, by solemnly declaring his su- 
 premacy and our subjection ; and this is best done in the 
 holocaust. The propitiatory is offered for sins and for 
 averting the penalties and scourges of sins ; and is the same 
 as the sin-offering. The Eucharistical is performed as a 
 return of thanks for benefits received ; and the impetratorial 
 for benefits to be received : but both in the old law were 
 called a peace-offering. On account of the time, it is divided 
 into the perpetual sacrijice, which was offered daily ; into 
 the sacrifice of the paschal lamb, which was offered at 
 Easter ; and into sacrifices, which were offered in other so- 
 lemnities. By reason of the mode, it is divided into bloody 
 and unbloody.'''* 
 
 " Observe that these manifold sacrifices both of the law 
 of nature and of the law of Moses, all prefigured the sacri- 
 fice of the new law ; and therefore they cease under the new 
 law. 
 
 " Is the sacrijice of the new law, single or tivofold ? 
 
 " Ans. The sacrifice of the cross is altogether the same as 
 to substance with the sacrifice of the mass ; because the 
 priest in both instances is the same, and the victim, Christ 
 the Lord, is the same ; and by thus regarding it the sacrifice 
 of the new law is single. If the mode and ceremony of offer- 
 ing be regarded, it is twofold : to wit, bloody, by which Christ 
 offered himself on the cross for the salvation of all : and un- 
 bloody, by which the same Christ, under the forms of bread 
 and wine, is daily offered in the mass in memory of the 
 bloody. Hence the Council of Trent, sess. 22, ch. 2, Of the 
 Sacrifice of the Mass, teaches : ' For the victim is one and 
 the same, the same who then offered himself on the cross, 
 now offering by the ministry of the priests, with only a dif- 
 ferent manner of offering.' The sacrifice of the new law 
 might be called twofold in another sense ; the one of redemp- 
 tion on the cross, by which he has merited for us a full re- 
 mission of sins : the other of religion in the Eucharist, by 
 which the same remission is applied to us." (No. 2.) 
 
 " Formerly a twofold mass was distinguished, the one of 
 the catechumens and penitents, whom the deacon dismissed 
 
CONCERNING THE MASS. 417 
 
 after the gospel and sermon ; and hence from the commence« 
 ment to the offertory it was called the mass of the catechu- 
 mens : the other of the faithful, and that lasted from the com- 
 mencement to the end, at which time the deacon dismissed 
 the people with these words : Ite missa est, Depart, the mass 
 is over: which second dismission even now remains, and 
 therefore the sacrifice which is daily offered in the temples 
 by the ministry of the priests, is called the mass. Further, 
 the mass is taken for that whole sacred action, by which, in 
 the Catholic Church, the unbloody sacrifice of the new law 
 is offered with the various prayers and ceremonies ; all these, 
 however, do not in the same way regard the sacrifice of the 
 mass : but some pertain to the essence of the sacrifice, others 
 to its integrity J others to greater reverence, the explanation 
 of the mystery, and the edification of the faithful, as will 
 appear afterwards." 
 
 " What is the sacrifice of the mass 1 Ans. It is the ex- 
 tetmal oblation of the body and blood of Christ, through 
 the forms of bread and wine, sensibly exhibited by a le- 
 gitimate minister, offered to God in recognition of his 
 supreme dominion, with the use of certain prayers and 
 ceremonies, prescribed by the Church for the better wor- 
 ship of God and edification of the people. The Zuinglians 
 and Calvin ists, and as many as deny the real presence of 
 Christ in the Eucharist, consequently deny that in the mass 
 there is offered a true sacrifice, properly so called. The 
 Lutherans, although they admit the real presence, yet also 
 reject the sacrifice of the mass, so that Luther, Bk. con- 
 cerning private mass, was not ashamed to write that it had 
 been stiggested to him, and that he had at length been per- 
 suaded by the devil, that the sacrifice of the mass was to 
 be abrogated. Therefore the innovators pretend, that in the 
 new law there is only the spiritual sacrifice of good works; 
 that the mass or Eucharist, is a mere commemoration of the 
 sacrifice of Christ on the cross, and that Christ has given 
 to us a table at which we may feast, but not an altar upon 
 which we may sacrifice : against which errors, the council 
 of Trent, sess. 22, can. 1., has decreed in these words : 
 ' Whoever shall say that in the mass there is not offered to 
 God, a true and proper sacrifice, or that Christ's being 
 35 * 
 
418 CONCERNING THE MASS. 
 
 offered, is nothing else than his being given to us to be 
 eaten : let him be accursed !' 
 
 " Prove that in the mass there is offered a true sacrifice, 
 properly so called ? Ans. 1. It is proved from the prophecy 
 of Malachi i. 10. I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord 
 of hosts; and I will not receive a gift of your hand. And 
 V. 11 ; For from the rising of the sun, even to the going 
 down, my name is great among the Gentiles, and in every 
 place there is sacrifce, and there is offered to my name a 
 clean oblation,^^ &c. 
 
 " 2. It is proved, because Christ, Ps. 109., is called a 
 priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedech ; which 
 words according to the apostle, Heb. vii. 8 and 9, so apply- 
 to Christ, that he cannot be called a priest after the order 
 of Aaron : but Melchisedech offered sacrifice in bread and 
 wine, as is plain from Gen. xiv. 18; therefore Christ also, 
 who was a priest according to the ceremony of offering of 
 Melchisedech, ought to offer sacrifice in bread and wine: 
 but now unless he has done this in the Eucharist, he has 
 nowhere done it; certainly not upon the cross, where he 
 offered his own body and blood in the proper forms ; there- 
 fore in the last supper : and not only there, but daily unto 
 this time, as the principal minister, he offers himself by 
 the ministry of the priests, and in this way he has also a 
 perpetual priesthood, ever living to make intercession for 
 us, as the apostle says, Hebrews vii." &c. 
 
 " 3. That the Eucharist is a sacrifice is proved from the 
 words of the institution, related. Matt. xxvi. Mark xiv. Luke 
 xxii., and 1 Cor. xi., from which we thus argue: in order 
 that the Eucharist may be a sacrifice it is sufficient that in it 
 there be an oblation with the shedding of blood : but as is 
 inferred from the passages cited, this predicted oblation is 
 found in the Eucharist ; because the question is concerning 
 the oblation and the effusion, which were done in act, when 
 Christ spoke, as the words of the present tense insinuate : 
 thus Luke xxii. 19, it is said of the body ; which is given for 
 you : according to the Apostle, 1 Cor. xi. 24, in the Greek 
 text : Which is broken for you : the Greek text of the three 
 evangelists has concerning the blood, is shed. Nor is it any 
 objection that we read in the evangelists, and in the canon 
 of the mass, shall he shed in the future, because both read- 
 
CONCERNING THE MASS. 419 
 
 ings are true, whether in the present, is shedj that is, now in 
 the supper ; or in the future, shall be shed, that is a little 
 while after on the cross, and afterwards to the end of the 
 world in a sacrifice to be celebrated by the priests. 
 
 " 4. It is proved from those passages of Scripture in which 
 the practice of the sacrifice of the mass is implied : thus Acts 
 xiii. 2, As they were ministering to the Lord, in Greek, 
 Xsi Tou^yovvTuv 5s auTwv tCj Kup/w, that is as they were offering 
 sacrifice ; and hence Erasmus renders it, as they were sacri- 
 ficing to the Lord. Likewise 1 Cor. x. 21, Ye cannot he par- 
 takers of the table of the Lord, and of the table of devils ; 
 where the Apostle implies that there is an altar and a sacrifice 
 of the Lord, just as there was an altar and sacrifice of devils. 
 
 *' 5. It is proved from tradition and the perpetual doctrine 
 and practice of the church, as is plain from the most ancient 
 Liturgies and from the Holy Fathers, who speaking of the 
 Eucharist call it a sacrifice, a host, a victim, &c. 
 
 " 6. It is proved from the circumstance that the definition 
 of a sacrifice properly so called pertains to the mass : for in 
 the consecration of both .forms (in which alone the essence 
 of the sacrifice consists) an oblation is held at least in the 
 act performed ; external as it is performed with words ; of 
 a sensible and permanent thing, viz., of the body and blood 
 of Christ, through the forms of sensible bread and wine : a 
 consecration is also afforded through the dedication to the 
 divine worship : also a change inasmuch as by the power of 
 the words the blood is separated from the body, and the body 
 from the blood : a legitimate object is also given, to wit, the 
 worship of God : for no more honorable worship can be 
 exhibited to God, than that by which the God-man is offered 
 to God, the Father : finally the primary minister, namely 
 Christ ; and the secondary, the priest, concur." (No. 3.) 
 
 The host or the thing offered in the sacrifice of the mass 
 IS the body and blood of Christ, not indeed simply, but 
 under the forms of bread and wine : " What is the action 
 in the mass in which the essence of the sacrifice consists 7 
 It is to be observed ; 1. That in the mass several actions con- 
 cur, as V. g. the elevation of the host, without which the 
 sacrifice subsists essentially ; because it imparts no change 
 except locally to the host which is still requisite for the 
 essence of the sacrifice.) 2. The breaking of the host, 
 
420 CONCERNING THE MASS. 
 
 which does indeed change the forms, but not the body of 
 Christ, &c. 3. The communion of the priest is not an essen- 
 tial part of the sacrifice: the reason is, 1. Because St. Tho- 
 mas says : ' This sacrament has the nature of a sacrifice 
 inasmuch as it is offered, but the nature of a sacrament in- 
 asmuch as it is taken.' 2. The talcing is a participation of the 
 benefit of the sacrifice : and therefore presupposes a slain vic- 
 tim through the consecration. 3. It is a settled point in the 
 faith that Christ offered sacrifice at the last supper; and yet it 
 is not a point of the faith that Christ did take the Eucharist : 
 which, however, according to the faith ought to have taken 
 place, if the eating of the host by the priest belonged to the 
 essence of the sacrifice. 
 
 "Notwithstanding, however, it is rather probable that 
 Christ did take his own body and blood in the last supper : 
 because Christ, Luke xxii. 15, says. With desi.re I have 
 desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer, 
 &c. Besides if he himself had not taken his own body 
 and blood, there was danger, lest his disciples might be 
 scandalized," &c. 
 
 " Moreover, the communion of the priest is an integral 
 part of the sacrifice : because the Eucharist is not only 
 a sacrifice, but also, a sacrament, and in so far has the 
 nature of food and drink, &c. And this is the reason why the 
 solicitude of the church is so great that she requires if the 
 priest overcome with sudden sickness should not be able to take 
 both kinds, that another priest be substituted even if he should 
 not be fasting, should another not be at hand to take both forms, 
 in order, says St. Thomas, that the sacrament may be per- 
 formed. From which it seems to follow, that the communion 
 of the person celebrating is not only of divine right but also 
 pertains to the integrity of the sacrifice. These things being 
 premised, the opinion is the more probable which teaches that 
 the essence of the sacrifice consists in the mere consecration 
 of both forms" (No. 4.) 
 
 " Next to Christ every priest legitimately ordained is the 
 true and proper minister of this sacrifice, because they only 
 can perform this sacrifice, who have received supernatural 
 power for this purpose: but the priests alone have received 
 this power, as is evident from their consecration. To its 
 validity the wickedness of the priest is no impediment, if he 
 
CONCERNING THE MASS. 421 
 
 only applies the proper matter and form with the intention of 
 consecrating : for the power of orders is indelible in him : 
 but in order to celebrate it piously and properly, amongst 
 other things which relate to the disposition of the mind, purity 
 of life, rectitude of intention, devotion and reverence are re- 
 quired." (No. 5.) 
 
 The object of the sacrifice of the mass is reverential^ inas- 
 much as it pertains to the honour of God, and the recognition 
 of his sovereign power, and of our subjection, &c. It is 
 Eucharisticalf inasmuch as it is an expression of thanks for 
 benefits received whether of natural or supernatural order, 
 and signally for our redemption, &c. It is propitiatory ; 
 because according to the Apostle, Heb. v. it is the principal 
 duty of priests for sins : but the Church certainly has her 
 own priests : therefore they are appointed to offer sacrifices 
 for sins : now that a sacrifice is offered for sin and that it is 
 propitiatory are synonymous : and hence the sacrifice of the 
 mass is offered in order to obtain the remission of sins, to 
 appease an offended God, for the remission of punishment 
 still due to sins, remitted as respects their guilt : and thus in 
 the mass it is said * For innumerable sins and offences,' &c. 
 
 " It is also impetratorial :* because by it we obtain both 
 spiritual benefits, as it applies the merits of the cross of 
 Christ, on which Christ has merited for us every kind of 
 spiritual blessings and temporal benefits : because these are 
 useful to us, and may be the means by which we are 
 brought to God. Hence it is offered for peace, for the wea- 
 ther, for averting rain, &c." See canon 3. of council of 
 Trent, at the commencement of this chapter. (No. 6.) 
 
 The effects of the sacrifice of the mass, are said to be 
 the following: 1. The most excellent worship of latria ; 
 both on account of the principal priest, who is Christ, and 
 on account of the victim, which also is Christ. 2. An ex- 
 pression of thanks for favours received. 3. The mediate 
 remission of sing, as well mortal as venial. 4. The paci- 
 fying of the divine anger, &c. 5. The remission of pun- 
 ishment still due from a sin remitted as to its guilt, and to 
 . be expiated in this life or in purgatory, unless its remission 
 
 * I claim the same right to coin an English word, that Peter Dens 
 has to make a Latin one ; impetratorial for " impetratorium ;" obtain- 
 ing by entreaty. 
 
422 CONCERNING THE MASS. 
 
 be obtained through this sacrifice, indulgences, &c. 6. The 
 obtaining of all spiritual and temporal blessings, in so far 
 as they conduce to salvation. (No. 7.) 
 
 The mass is infallibly efficacious, in so far as it is an act 
 of worship and eucharistical ; so also, inasmuch as it makes 
 satisfaction for just persons, whether living or dead, who are 
 obnoxious to the debt of temporal punishments, which re- 
 mains after the penalty has been remitted. As for the dead, 
 it is probable that God either has regard, to the degree of 
 the pious disposition in which they departed, or that the 
 punishments are moderated, according to the secret judg- 
 ments of his justice. It is not to be supposed that the rich, 
 who can have many masses offered fc>r them, will fare 
 better in the other world than the poor, for whom scarcely 
 any mass is offered ; because the poor usually have less to 
 answer for than the rich ; besides, their suffering souls re- 
 ceive benefit from the masses put into the treasury of the 
 Church, according to the rate of the holiness of every man. 
 
 The remission of sins is not infallibly secured by the 
 mass, for many persevere in sin, for whom the sacrifice of 
 the mass is frequently offered, yet more plentiful actual 
 grace is infallibly imparted, in order to elicit acts of contri- 
 tion, unless some obstacle should be in the way, such as the 
 desire of actual sin might be. 
 
 *' Is the mass of a bad priest worth less than that of a 
 good one?'''' In so far as the validity of the sacrifice is 
 concerned, there can be no difference ; nor can the mass of 
 a bad priest be less profitable than that of a good one, inas- 
 much as he is a minister of the Church. 
 
 In so far as the prayers which are said in the mass, are 
 considered as the work of the priest himself, as a private 
 person, a preference should be given to the prayers of a good 
 priest. (No. 8.) 
 
 There is a triple portion of fruits resulting from the sacri- 
 fice of the mass : general, special, and most special. The 
 general portion is that which falls to the whole church, ac- 
 cording to that passage of the Roman Missal, " But also for 
 all believing Christians, living and dead," &c. "Henno 
 teaches that a priest excluding even a single member of the 
 church in his application, whether from hatred or from en- 
 mity, or from any other pretext, sins grievously against 
 
CONCERNING THE MASS. 423 
 
 charity, and the obedience due to Christ and the church." 
 The special portion belongs to those for whom the priest in- 
 tends specially to sacrifice ; he may, however, apply it to 
 himself, when he celebrates mass for no one : " But this is 
 indeed very convenient," says Daelman, " that every priest 
 may sometimes apply to himself a special portion of the 
 sacrifice, as he himself often needs it." The most special 
 portion belongs to the priest, even when he is celebrating 
 for another, although for pay : and indeed, according to 
 Suarez, Collet, Steyaert, Daelman, and Pauwels, against 
 Henno, this portion belongs properly to the priest thus cele- 
 brating, so that he cannot even relinquish it to the other 
 when applying for it ; because the priest, according to the 
 apostle to Heb. vii. 27, ought ^^Jirst to offer for his own sins, 
 and then for those of the people" (No. 9.) 
 
 The special portion is left to the free application and 
 disposition of the person celebrating ; but if it is not applied 
 to any person either explicitly or implicitly, it then reverts to 
 the treasury of the church. (No. 10.) 
 
 A distinction is to be made between the value of the mass 
 and its effect; its value is infinite, "considered as to the 
 substance and sufficiency of the thing offered, and of the 
 principal offerer, Christ ; because this sacrifice, as to its sub- 
 stance, is the same with the sacrifice of the cross, whose 
 value, as to its sufficiency, is infinite : therefore, also the 
 value of this sacrifice. And hence, there are no benefits, 
 however great, but may be obtained by this sacrifice ; nor so 
 many, but more may be obtained ; nor for so many, but that 
 it may avail for more : and likewise, no punishment is so 
 great for which it is not sufficient to make satisfaction ; nei- 
 ther in so many subjects, but that it may avail in more." 
 As to its actual application and efficiency, the value of the 
 sacrifice of the mass is finite, both with respect to its ability 
 to make satisfaction, and procure blessings; this is plain 
 from the practice of the church, and the common opinion of 
 the faithful ; as in order to obtain one and the same thing 
 for one and the same soul, the sacrifice of the mass may be 
 repeated. This limitation of the advantage " proceeds from 
 the disposition and devotion of him for whom the sacrifice is 
 offered ;" and according to this opinion, the sacrifice of the 
 mass offered for many is just as profitable to each individual, 
 
424 CONCERNING THE MASS. 
 
 other things being equal, as if it were offered only for one 
 because as the value is infinite, and the sacrifice benefits 
 every one according to the quantity of his own devotion, as 
 St. Thomas leaches, nothing is taken away from the advan- 
 tage due to the devotion of him for whom it is offered, by the 
 circumstance that it is offered for others : for that which is 
 infinite is inexhaustible." Yet it would be wrong to receive 
 several payments for one mass. (No. 11.) 
 
 " For whom may the sacrifice of the mass he offered 7 
 Generally speaking, for the living and the dead." Under 
 the former head are included all Christ's faithful, as these 
 words of the canon of the mass show : " We offer to thee for 
 all the orthodox, and the worshippers of the Catholic and 
 apostolic faith." For catechumens and unbelievers, the mass 
 may not only be offered indirectly but also directly, for the 
 good of unbelievers themselves, whether temporal or spiri- 
 tual. It is proper also to offer mass indirectly for baptized 
 heretics, but whether it may be done directly is a controvert- 
 ed point ; and the more probable opinion is, that baptized 
 heretics are entirely excluded from all the direct benefits of 
 the sacrifice of the mass. (Alas ! Alas !) Mass can not 
 and ought not to be offered for the lost, who are suffering in 
 hell, because it can not help them, for in hell there is no 
 redemption. The sacrifice of the mass is not offered to the 
 Saints, as it is a worship of latria, which is due to God alone. 
 Nor is it offered for the Saints, because as they enjoy the 
 vision of God, there is no more guilt remaining for which 
 they must atone. It is piously and usefully offered only for 
 the souls in purgatory ; and it is certain that the sacrifice of the 
 Mass is infallibly of advantage to them for the remission of 
 the punishments remaining from guilt, at least as to a part. 
 (No. 12.) 
 
 Concerning the Payment of Masses. (No. 14.) 
 " It is to be observed that in the primitive church every 
 one of the faithful as often as they assembled for the solem- 
 nities of the mass offered according to his own means bread 
 and wine, of which a small portion was consecrated and the 
 remaining portion fell to the priests and the clergy. After- 
 wards the custom was introduced of offering money at the 
 altar, in place of bread : and to this succeeded the practice 
 
CONCERNING THE MASS. 425 
 
 of giving pay to the priest, in order that advantage might be 
 derived from the sacrifice either for themselves or for others. 
 It is proper to receive pay for the celebration of the mass ,* 
 not indeed as the price of the mass, but on the ground of 
 support. " The labourer is worthy of his hire," and " they 
 who serve at the altar," &c. iCor. ix. 13. It is not simony 
 according to Daelman if a priest refuses to offer mass unless 
 he is paid for it. The amount of pay depends upon custom, 
 which will be varied by time, place and circumstances ; and 
 priests are properly admonished by Steyaert, not to ask more 
 than the amount thus authorized, as this would be to sin both 
 against the church and against justice. Yet they may ac- 
 cept more if it is given gratis from liberality. It would not 
 be proper for one, who has received a larger amount than 
 the ordinary stipend for a mass, to give the usual sum to 
 another on condition of his performing the sacrifice, and 
 retain the balance ; unless he should be a beneficiate, or 
 unless it is done as an act of kindness to another because he 
 is poor, or a relative, &c. 
 
 " Marj a priest^ who is only obliged to celebrate in a cer- 
 tain place for the convenience of the people, ivith a free in- 
 tention, as they say, receive another payment besides ? 
 
 " Ans. Yes : because in such a case the priest imposes 
 on himself two obligations, for which he may receive distinct 
 payments : the one as the price of the extrinsic labour by 
 which he is bound to be prepared for the celebration in such 
 an hour, in such a place, &c. : the other as support, which 
 he justly claims from him who desires the mass." Whether 
 a priest omitting to celebrate a mass for which he has been 
 paid, sins mortally or not, is not altogether settled as yet. 
 In case a priest receives money for masses, and transfers the 
 obligation of saying them to another, for merchandize, v. g., 
 books, he does nothing wrong, provided it is morally certain 
 that the masses will be duly celebrated, that he does not re- 
 ceive more than the pay he has taken, and that the goods 
 are just as acceptable to the buyer as the money. It is also 
 perfectly right for a priest, who has received a florin for 100 
 Sacra, to say to another, " help me in reading, afterwards I 
 will help you," though the latter has received only 8 stivers' 
 worth of Sacra, and the former gives him nothing more. It 
 is not proper for a priest to collect several payments for 
 36 
 
426 CONCERNING THE MASS. 
 
 masses, which he foresees he will not be able to celebrate for 
 a long time to come ; and indeed he sins mortally who defers 
 the masses longer than is just, and is bound to make restitu- 
 tion. According to some, one or two months is a moderate 
 delay ; but this will depend on circumstances ; if, v. g., a 
 mass is offered for a woman in travail, for one in the agony 
 of death, &c., it is a mortal sin to defer it for one day. 
 (No. 14.) 
 
 Pastors or others who have a parochial charge are bound, 
 by virtue of the pastoral office, to apply a mass occasionally, 
 specially for the benefit of their parishioners, without pay. 
 (No. 15.) 
 
 As for the time of celebrating mass, the rubrics of the 
 Roman missal affirm that " a private mass may be said at 
 least after the matin and lauds, at any hour from daybreak 
 to noon." And if public exigency requires, the time may be 
 anticipated, or for the benefit of a sick person, who would 
 otherwise die without the viaticum, it is proper to celebrate 
 immediately after midnight. As to the place in which the 
 mass is to be offered, according to common right, it ought to 
 be in a church consecrated by the bishop, or blessed either 
 by the same, or by a priest by his permission, or in an ora- 
 tory, appointed to this use by those who have the authority. 
 
 " But there is this difference between the consecration and 
 benediction, that the consecration by far more laborious, con- 
 cerns the walls, which are anointed with chrism : but the 
 benediction may be done with holy water and a few prayers, 
 and has respect to the floor or pavement of the church." 
 The church is violated by voluntary homicide, or by any 
 considerable effusion of human blood. " The church is vio- 
 lated by the voluntary effusion humani seminis." Whether 
 the effusion be according to nature or against nature ; " sive 
 per copulam fornicariam, sive conjugalem !" " Authors 
 commonly decide that the church is not violated by pollution 
 which occurs in sleep, although it might perhaps have been 
 culpable in the cause." The burial in the church of an 
 excommunicated person, particularly of one denounced, or 
 a notorious persecutor of the clergy, also, of a Gentile or 
 infidel, desecrates the church; so too, the burial of an unbap- 
 tized child. In the same modes a cemetery that has been 
 blessed is violated ; indeed if the cemetery is attached to the 
 
CONCERNING THE MASS. 427 
 
 church, the desecration of the church violates it, but 301 vice 
 verscl. It will not be lawful to bury in it until it has been 
 reconciled. In order to render an immediate reconcilation 
 of a church necessary, the causes must be public ; if they 
 are private, the ordinances may be administered until a suit- 
 able opportunity of effecting the reconciliation is afforded. 
 (No. 16.) 
 
 Certain things respecting the celebration of the 
 
 MASS, worthy to BE OBSERVED. (No. 17.) 
 
 " To touch the sacred vessels whilst they actually contain 
 the body and blood of Christ the Lord, is by common opin- 
 ion, not permitted to any one under pain of mortal sin, ex- 
 cepting the priest or deacon. It is permitted to the sub- 
 deacons alone to touch the empty vessels ; it is unlawful for 
 others, except in case of necessity or special leave; but 
 according to common opinion only, under venial sin. The 
 case is the same with the purifications applied for cleansing 
 the cup ; which, however, after they have been washed by 
 the sub-deacon with the first ablution, which ought to be 
 cast into the Church sink, may be touched and repaired by 
 the laity, and so long as they are not considerably broken, 
 they do not need a fresh benediction afler the washing. 
 When does a cup lose its consecration ? When it is so 
 broken that it does not remain fit for a convenient sacred 
 use; V. g., if the cup be separated from the foot, (unless the 
 foot should be turned), or a hole has been made in the hot- 
 tom of the cup, or the cup is otherwise very much broken. 
 The consecration is not lost, although the gilding of the cup 
 should fall off a little. However, the opinion is the more 
 common, that the cup needs a new consecration, if the in- 
 ternal surface of the bowl be newly gilded. Steyaert says, 
 that the custom of giving to boys, labouring under a cough 
 peculiar and most distressing to them, wine to drink out of 
 a consecrated cup, as a medicine, is not to be accused of 
 any superstition, or any other vice. Is it lawful sometimes 
 to celebrate without the sacred robes ? He who celebrates 
 without the principal sacred vestments, v. g. the albe or 
 stole, sins grievously, even in a case of necessity, v. g., in 
 order that a sick man may receive the viaticum ; so authors 
 generally decide : to celebrate in any urgent necessity, with- 
 
428 CONCERNING THE MASS. 
 
 out some one of the minor vestments, v. g., the maniple or 
 girdle, appears lawful to many. When the priest puts on 
 the sacred robes, he ought to recite the prayers prescribed 
 by the rubrics, not, however, under pain of mortal sin, as 
 Neesen pretends ; whom Pauwels justly contradicts. The 
 sacred garments lose their benediction when they no longer 
 retain the form under which they have been blessed ; so 
 that they now are unfit for the functions of the ministry: 
 and thus the blessing of the albe ceases, if the sleeve is torn 
 off or separated from it ; not, however, if the sleeve is fast- 
 ened to the body with cords. The blessing of the girdle 
 equally ceases, if it is so torn that neither part which re- 
 mains, is fit for girding ; not, however, if the one part is 
 sufficient for girding; and then Collet says, for the sake of 
 greater convenience, the other part may be tied to it. Nei- 
 ther is it sufficient to mend vestments thus torn, that they 
 may dispense with the blessing, but when mended, they 
 need a fresh benediction. Sacred vestments, so much worn 
 that they can no longer subserve their proper use, are not 
 according to the canons, to be applied to common purposes ; 
 but others are either to be made out of them, which may 
 subserve the use of the Church, or they must be burned, 
 and the ashes must be laid aside in the sacristy, or in the 
 wall, or in the interstices of the pavements, that they may 
 not be trampled upon by the feet of those who enter. It is 
 to be observed respecting all the aforesaid things, to wit, 
 altars, vestments, &c., that it is more probable, that they 
 are not consecrated or blessed by the mere use, but only by 
 the rite and ceremonies prescribed by the Church." 
 
 The reader will observe that our author has not been quite so pre- 
 cise in defining nice points, in sacred casuistry, in this instance, as in 
 most cases which we have reviewed ; this is to be regretted, as there 
 are several questions, which naturally suggest themselves to an inqui- 
 sitive mind, in connection with this interesting, intricate, and most 
 solemn and momentous subject. It is true we are told, that if the 
 sleeve of the albe be tied to the body with cords, the blessing does 
 not forsake it ; but what if it he fastened with pins ? And in this 
 case must the pins be blessed or consecrated, before they can he applied 
 to this holy vse ? And if thus blessed, may they be employed for pro- 
 fane or common purposes, after the sleeve has been regularly stitched 
 to the albe with sacred thread? Again ; we arc satisfied, if a girdle 
 
CONCERNING THE MASS. 429 
 
 has been torn, and both pieces are like the Dutcliman's rope, that they 
 may be reverently tied together, and thus comfort and sustain the 
 bowels of the holy priest, who wears it ; but the question is, what if 
 the one part, which has been laid aside as insufficient to encircle the 
 loins of its former owner, should be found ample for a stomach of 
 smaller circumference, may this rag of a girdle in such case, be used 
 as a proper Selt by another ? And if so, will it need another benedic 
 tion ? And again, supposing a priest celebrates mass in an alb, 
 which has but one sleeve, so that the faithful are scandalized by the 
 apparition of one arm of his sacred shirt, or his still more sacred 
 skin, will the sacrament be invalidated by this irreverent display, and 
 by the sacrilegious disregard of the custom and ceremony of the 
 Church 7 These and similar questions, grievously torment our mind, 
 but being in bad odour with the bishop, we apprehend that our per- 
 plexity will never be relieved. But to return : 
 
 It is not in itself wrong to celebrate mass in a vernacular 
 tongue, but the church has forbidden the practice for the 
 sake of preserving uniformity. In offering mass, it is requi- 
 site that there should be a minister to respond to the priest, 
 unless some urgent necessity should excuse, such as adminis- 
 tering the viaticum to a sick person. The rubrics require 
 that the person officiating be in all cases, a male; in case of 
 absolute necessity in some instances a female may be per- 
 mitted to respond. (No. 17.) 
 
 Concerning the precept of hearing Mass. (No. 18.) 
 " Among the five precepts of the church, the second is 
 that of hearing mass on Lord's days and other festival days, 
 expressed in these words : ' Reverently hear the sacred 
 office of the mass on festival days' : this office includes not 
 only the essential or integral parts of the sacrifice, but the 
 whole liturgy from the beginning to the end. But this is a 
 principle of ecclesiastical law, founded however upon natu- 
 ral and divine right. Who are obliged by this precept ? 
 All the faithful of both sexes after they have attained to years 
 of discretion, which generally takes place about the seventh 
 year of the age, and therefore children of such an age are 
 to be compelled to go to the mass. How great is the 
 obligation of this precept? It is important, because it is 
 a weighty matter the object is most important, in order, 
 says Pauwels, that the memory of the passion and resur- 
 36* 
 
480 CONCERNINCx THE MASS. 
 
 rection of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in order that God may 
 be honoured with the sacrifice, in as much as the people 
 present at the mass unite their affections and devotion with 
 the priest, who is celebrating. Hence the sin of its omission 
 is from its nature mortal ; therefore he who with sufficient 
 deliberation omits mass on a festival day, or a considerable 
 part of the mass, sins mortally. It may, however, become 
 venial, not only from the want of deliberation of the action, 
 v. g. if any one out of merely venial ignorance of the festival 
 omits hearing mass; but also from the smallness of the 
 matter, so that he sins only venially who omits merely a 
 trifling part." The amount which is to be regarded as con- 
 siderable depends both upon the quality and the quantity of 
 the omitted portion. Thus he sins mortally, who is absent 
 at the consecration, or who suffers his thoughts to be dis- 
 tracted at the time, or who is not present at the communion, 
 because in these the essence and integrity of the sacrifice 
 consist. A considerable part is detracted from the quantity, 
 when a large part of the prayers, orations and ceremonies, 
 which take place in the performance of the mass is lost, 
 according to some the third, according to others the fourth 
 part of the mass. If a person who has been present from 
 the commencement goes out immediately after the commu- 
 nion, he is by common opinion excusable. The dignity and 
 importance of the omitted portion, and the state of the heart 
 are also to be taken into consideration. The faithful are to 
 be admonished to be present betimes at catechism and preach- 
 ing from beginning to end. Several small omissions in the 
 same mass coalesce, and therefore, if in the aggregate they 
 constitute a considerable omission, they induce mortal sin, 
 &c: &c. (No. 18.) 
 
 Actual intention, and devout attention are required, in all 
 who would hear mass. Sacramental confession is strongly 
 recommended as an act preparatory to the mass. (No. 20.) 
 
 Four causes are usually assigned as affording sufficient 
 excuse of absence from hearing mass ; they are inability^ 
 charity^ dvty, and custom. Inability may be physical, 
 spiritual, and moral. Those who are in prison, or sick in 
 bed, or at sea, or living in a heretical country, in which the 
 mass is not celebrated, are excused on the score of physical 
 inability. So too, one who omits the duty through inculpa- 
 
CONCERNING THE MASS. 431 
 
 ble inadvertence or ignorance. But the sick must use the 
 necessary means for recovering strength, else they are guilty 
 of the omission of the mass. If the sick person has a chapel, 
 and can attend without much inconvenience, he ought to see 
 to it that some priest celebrates mass there. Spiritual ina- 
 bility proceeds from censure, by which any one may be 
 hindered from hearing mass ; hence the faithful are excused 
 if there is no other priest at hand except an interdicted one, 
 or one who has been excommunicated by name. Moral in- 
 ability excuses those, who cannot hear mass except with 
 great danger, inconvenience, or some considerable injury, 
 either of body, reputation, or fortune. On this ground, the 
 sick, who are apprehensive of aggravating their disease, or 
 of incurring a relapse, also they who cannot leave their work 
 or flock on account of danger of theft, or incursion of the 
 enemy, may be excused. So too a respectable girl, who is 
 pregnant from secret fornication, is excusable. Difference 
 of sex and constitution is to be regarded, in deciding whether 
 the case is really one of moral inability. Charity to a 
 neighbour excuses from attending mass ; v. g., waiting on a 
 sick person, by your presence preventing homicide, serious 
 injury, grievous sins or quarrels. Official Duty also ex- 
 cuses ; thus a soldier may not leave his station, nor a general 
 his army, in order to hear mass. So also persons engaged 
 in glass or iron works, after the furnace has been kindled, 
 may absent themselves from mass, if they cannot leave with- 
 out serious inconvenience or loss, and are unable to procure 
 substitutes, &c. The claim of custom obtains until their 
 purification in the case of women lately delivered. Billuart 
 observes that he who in good faith believes himself to be ex- 
 cused from mass, although the reason be not sufficient, sins 
 only venially. The case is the same if the mass be omitted 
 contrary to intention through some slight neglect. Travel- 
 lers who go from a place, where there is a festival, are bound 
 to hear mass before they leave ; not, however, if they merely 
 pass through such a place. Yet they are excused, if by 
 hearing mass they would lose the opportunity of going in a 
 certain ship, or forfeit the society of a travelling companion, 
 who is indispensable, because without him they cannot find 
 the road, or because robbers infest the country. 
 
432 CONCERNING THE MASS. 
 
 There is no rite of which the Church of Rome boasts more loudly, 
 than the mass, and yet we need not be surprised at this, as she always 
 glories in her shame ! Of all the blasphemous and idolatrous cere- 
 monies, which Satan has ever invented, the mass is the most abomina- 
 ble. Such another compound of silly trumpery and audacious impiety, 
 is not to be found on earth. The substance of the following sketch 
 of the matter, form and ceremony of the mass, is prepared from an 
 authorized missal of the Romish Church, printed at Lyons, A. D. 
 1520, from the Rationale of Durandus, &c. ; and I give it to my 
 reader with a few, merely verbal alterations, as I find it in a work 
 published in London, 1735. First, the priest who is to officiate, puts 
 on his head an amice, a thing, which signifies the veil that the Jews 
 put on Christ ; then over the rest of his clothes an alb, a white linen 
 garment, which betokens a garment of that colour, which Herod is 
 said to have put upon Christ ; then he puts on his girdle, signifying 
 the cord with which our Saviour was bound in the garden ; next he 
 puts a stole about his neck, as an emblem of the cord with which 
 Christ was led to execution ; and another contrivance called a mani- 
 pie, something like a fetter on his left hand, in allusion to the cord 
 with which Christ was bound to the pillar when scourged. Over all 
 this sacred apparatus, a rich vestment variously figured, is thrown. 
 Some have the picture of God, or of the Holy Ghost ; others, some 
 passage in sacred history, or a cross curiously wrought behind and 
 before ; and this we are to understand, as significant of the purple 
 garment with which the Jews clothed our Saviour. 
 
 Thus accoutred, cap-a-pie, forth comes his reverence with solemn 
 dignity, and moves his sacred person towards the altar, which, be it 
 remembered, represents the cross, and is covered with a white cloth, 
 denoting the linen that shrouded the body of the Lord. On this, 
 stands the chalice or cup, which is a symbol of the sepulchre 'in 
 which Christ lay, whilst the Patin or plate that holds the cake and 
 covers it, represents the stone which was laid on his grave. On the 
 altar stands a lighted candle, emblematical of the light of Christ, and 
 of the rays of his divinity; also a flagon of wine and water, and 
 the cake made of a wafer. The clerk, or sometimes a boy, who re- 
 sponds to the priest, is in attendance, bell in hand. The priest crosses 
 himself on the forehead and on the breast, and after advancing to- 
 wards the altar, retreats with three motions, significant of Christ's 
 prostration in the garden. He then begins the confitcor, or confes- 
 sion, which is made to the Virgin Mary and other saints, desiring 
 them to pray for him. Whilst repeating this, he bows very low, in 
 
CONCERNING THE MASS. 433 
 
 order to provoke the people to humility; though they generally know 
 no more what he says, than if it were wild Irish, and many of them 
 not near as much. At the words, mea culpa, med culpa, mea maximd 
 culpa, he strikes himself violently on the breast, to show that sin lies 
 in the heart. Then he gives the absolution ; and coming close to the 
 altar, makes a cross upon it and devoutly kisses it. Then he begins 
 the Introit, or office of the mass, commencing, Command me, O Lord, 
 to speak well, «fec., which he speaks aloud, of course, in Latin ; and 
 answers himself, " Dominus sit in corde," &c. ; the Lord he in my 
 heart and in my mouth, tScc. Then he says the Kyrie Eleison, (two 
 Greek words, signifying. Lord have mercy; which are repeated nine 
 times in honour of the Trinity, three times to each person.) Upon 
 this, advancing to the middle of the altar, and looking upon the pax, 
 the cross on which the sacramental bread is hung, he makes a pro- 
 found courtesy, and says the " Gloria in excelsis ;" then wheeling 
 round, he says, " Dominus vobiscum ;" the Lord he with you ; and im- 
 mediately returning to the altar, goes over sundry collects, the sub- 
 stance of most of which is, that he desires to be heard for the sake 
 of the merits and intercession of certain saints. This part of the 
 service, duly and reverently performed, he reads the epistle, still of 
 course in Latin ; then follows the gradual, or as it is sometimes called, 
 for brevity's sake, the grail, and after this the hallelujah. Next come 
 the tract and sequence, a pair of short prayers, which are soon mum- 
 bled over ; which done, his Reverence takes up the mass-book, goes 
 to the end of the altar, uncovers the chalice, and looking into it, 
 makes a solemn bow to the pax, and then reads the gospel in Latin, 
 which being finished, the faithful cross their breasts, that the devil 
 may not steal away the good seed out of their hearts, although there is 
 no doubt that they might as well save themselves that trouble. After 
 this, the priest kisses the book, and rehearses the creed ; then turning 
 to the people a second time, he says, Dominus vohiscvm, and going 
 again to the altar, he proceeds with the offertory or offering, which is 
 dispatched by taking up the chalice, with the wafer upon the cover of 
 it, lifting up his eyes, and saying, Suscipe sancta Trinitas, &,c. "Take, 
 O holy Trinity, this oblation, which I, unworthy sinner, offer in honour 
 of thee, of the blessed Virgin Mary, and of all thy saints, for the sal- 
 vation of the living, and for the rest and quiet of all the faithful that 
 are dead." Then setting down the chalice, he says, acceptum sit, &c. 
 ♦' Let this new sacrifice be acceptable to Almighty God." Then going 
 to the other end of the altar, he v/ashes his hands, and with a bow to 
 the pax, turning to the altar, he makes a cross over it, and kisses it ; 
 
434 CONCERNING THE MASS. 
 
 upon this he requests the prayers of the people, and again facing the 
 altar with a bow, he begins the secret prayers in behalf of the people ; 
 for which, however, they are none the wiser nor better. These being 
 concluded, he bursts out into a loud exhortation to the people to lift 
 up their hearts, be thankful, &c. &c. Then he reads the preface, and 
 in pronouncing the sanctus, " Holy, holy, holy. Lord God," &c., they 
 lift up their hands and voice, and suddenly the priest kisses the mass- 
 book again. 
 
 Now comes the Canon of the mass consisting of a string of litanies 
 and prayers ; here with frequent crossings, he prays for the Pope, &c. 
 and after this, the people go to pray for all whom they can remember 
 of their friends and benefactors,* desiring that for the merits of such and 
 such saints, they may be saved from evil. Then again he crosses the 
 wafer and chalice, standing with his back to the people, and takes up 
 the wafer in his hands, when the boy rings the bell, which invites the 
 people to look up, whilst the priest repeats the consecration in Latin 
 as follows : " The day before our Lord suffered, he took bread into his 
 holy and adorable hands, and lifting up his eyes to heaven to God, 
 and giving thanks, he blessed, (here his reverence crosses and re-crosses 
 the wafer,) brake and gave to his disciples, saying. Take, eat ye all of 
 this, for it is my body." These last five words are those in which the 
 transubstantiating virtue lies. Then with a world of circumstance 
 the priest lifts it over his head, for the people to see it; (this is called 
 the elevation of the host;) and they fall down on their knees and wor- 
 ship it. This done, he takes up the cup, saying : In like manner, 
 after supper, he took this noble chalice into his holy and adorable hands, 
 and after thanks to the Father, he blessed, (here he crosses again,) and 
 gave it to his disciples, saying, Take ye, and drink you ai.l of this : for 
 this is the cup of my blood, a new and everlasting testament, a mys- 
 tery of faith, which shall be shed for you and for many, for the remis- 
 sion of sins : so oft as you do this, you shall do it in remembrance 
 of me." These words as well as those spoken over the bread are 
 uttered softly and with a low voice. Then the priest holding up the 
 chalice in his hand, breathes upon the wine, and kneels down to it and 
 the bread ; then rising up he holds the cup over his head that the 
 people may likewise worship it. This ceremony over, he sets down 
 the chalice and covers it with the cloth, and then kneels down again 
 before the host and cup, and with outspread arms kisses the altar. 
 All this is done with the proper quota of crosses and bows. Then 
 follows the second memento or prayer for the dead ; after which the 
 priest takes up the wafer, shakes it up and down about the chalice, 
 
CONCERNING THE MASS. 435 
 
 saying, per ipaum^ et cum ipso, et in ipso, takes up the cover of the 
 chalice, and crosses himself on the breast, forehead, and crown ; this 
 uncovering of the cup is to be considered emblematical of the rending 
 of the veil of the temple at the death of Christ ; he then crosses the 
 chalice three times over the top to typify the three hours during which 
 Christ hung upon the cross ; and twice on the brim to show the over- 
 flowing of his blood, and then by laying down the host on the altar 
 cloth, he professes to represent Christ's being taken 4own from the 
 cross. Then his reverence takes up the host, which he breaks into 
 three pieces, two of which he holds in his hand over the chalice, and 
 the third he puts into it ; (sometimes however, this ceremony is omit- 
 ted ;) upon this, the priest kneels down and says the agnus to the 
 bread, which is this prayeT : " O lamb of God, who takest away the 
 sins of the world, have mercy upon us"; this must be rehearsed three 
 times. Then he takes the pax (i. e. kisses an image of a crucifix in 
 the missal,) and saying Peace he with thee, gives it to the clerk or boy, 
 who carries it about to the people to kiss. Meanwhile the priest 
 drinks up the wine, and eats the wafer, and then prays : **Quod ore 
 sumpsimus, &c. That which we have taken with our mouth. Lord 
 grant that we may receive with a pure mind, and. that it may of a 
 temporal gift be made an everlasting remedy, &c." By this time, the 
 boy has come back with the pax ; and his reverence holds out the cup 
 for more wine, which he drinks off three times, then wipes his mouth, 
 goes to the lower end of the altar, washes his hands, comes back to 
 the altar, takes up the chalice, and does his best to extract every drop, 
 that he may with a clear conscience say that he has drunk all of it. 
 This done, he goes to the upper end of the altar, reads certain prayers 
 and collects, and says to the people the third time. The Lord be with 
 you. Ite, missa est ; " Depart, the mass is over." Then he kneels 
 down at the altar, says a prayer to the Virgin Mary, and rising up, 
 repeats in his way the beginning of St. John's gospel, crossing himself 
 to admiration ; lastly, his reverence closes the book, folds up the cor- 
 poral, (or altar clotFi,) shuts the chalice, disrobes himself in due method, 
 puts out the candle, makes his honours, and exif ." This picture does not 
 profess to present all the sacred antics and gesticulations, «fcc., which 
 are practised on such occasions, nor are they at all times in all places 
 exactly the same, but it is believed that it affords a fair representation 
 of the principal scenes, which may be witnessed at the ecclesiastical 
 exhibitions, in which the Romish priests are the principal dramatis 
 persona. This is a specimen of the mode of worship practised in a 
 church which claims to be exclusively the church of Christ; the mem 
 
436 CONCERNING THE MASS. 
 
 bers of its communion are the faithful^ the true worshippers who 
 worship the Father in spirit and in truth ! 
 
 Although the absurdity of the mass is self-evident, yet a few sugges- 
 tions may perhaps not be unacceptable to the general reader. We re- 
 mark then, 
 
 1 . This pretended sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ, is con- 
 trary to the institution of Christ. He did not stand at the altar to offer 
 himself a sacrifice to God, that the disciples might adore it, but sat at 
 a common table to set apart bread and wine to sacred use, and to dis- 
 tribute them to his disciples, that they might take, eat, and drink 
 them. He says, 2'ake ye, eat ye, drink ye ; he does not say, " sacrifice 
 my body and blood," or " make an unbloody oblation of me !" 
 
 2. It is directly contrary to the positive injunctions of Scripture, 
 which expressly declare that Christ need not offer himself, or be of 
 fered OFTEN, but that the offering he once made, is sufficient to the end 
 of the world. " Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high- 
 priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others ; 
 (for there must he often have suffered since the foundation of the 
 world ;) but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared, to put 
 away sin, by the sacrifice of himself." (Heb. ix. 25, 26.) And again , 
 " By the which will we are sanctified, through the offering of the body 
 of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest standeth daily minister- 
 ing, and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take 
 away sins : but this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, for 
 ever sat down on the right hand of God ; &c. For by one offering he 
 hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." (Heb. x. 10, 11, 12, 
 14.) Therefore if Christ cannot be sacrificed again, according to the 
 word of God, it is an insolent sacrilege to speak of the mass being a 
 propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead. This ar- 
 gument Peter Dens professes to notice and to refute ; and of course 
 adopts the favourite Romish method of distinction. He distinguishes 
 between the one ohlation of Christ as of sufficient price to purchase the 
 redemption of the world, but not as sufiicient for the application of its 
 benefits. But this is a mere quibble, which does not mend the matter. 
 For according to Peter Dens, the mass avails only for believers, but 
 if Paul is to be believed, Christ has by this " onc oflfering for ever per- 
 fected them that are sanctified," and consequently they have no need 
 of the mass, which professes to be a repetition of this sacrifice. 
 
 But we are demurely told, Melchisedec was a type of Christ ; and 
 the bread and wine he brought forth to Abraham, was a real, proper 
 sacrifice. Hence when the Scripture says, in allusion to Christ, " thou 
 
CONCERNING THE MASS. 437 
 
 art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec," there is an allu- 
 sion to the mass, and a warrant for the unbloody sacrifice. To this 
 we reply, that there is neither truth, sense, nor probability in this ar- 
 gument. 
 
 1 . It is not true that the bread and wine, which Melchisedec brought 
 forth, was a proper sacrifice ; the Scripture does not call it such, and 
 from its nature it was incapable of being a sacrifice, as it had neither 
 life, nor blood, which every expiatory sacrifice must have ; and tran- 
 substantiation had not then been thought of. Melchisedec is called a 
 priest, from the fact of his blessing Abraham, which was part of his 
 priestly office, and not because he brought out bread and wine, which 
 as an act of beneficence pertained rather to his kingly office. Besides, 
 it is said, " he brought forth bread and wine," not he sacrificed them. 
 He simply entertained Abraham and his servants. 
 
 2. If there was any sacrifice, to whom was it made ? To God ? 
 Surely not ; for as before remarked, every propitiatory sacrifice re- 
 quired a living victim, and as Melchisedec did not transubstantiate the 
 bread and wine into the body and blood of the Saviour, this could not 
 have been an expiatory offering, and therefore serves but badly as the 
 prototype of the mass. Did he sacrifice to Abraham ? Was Abraham 
 a God ? Besides, did not Abraham pay tithes to Melchisedec, and thus 
 acknowledge his inferiority, according to the apostle's own inference ; 
 and how then should Melchisedec sacrifice to Abraham ? 
 
 3. It is not probable ; for can it for a moment be imagined, if there 
 had been any such mystery in this bread and wine of Melchisedec, 
 that the Apostle Paul, who speaks of Melchisedec as a type of Christ, 
 but for reasons very different from those which Papists assign, would 
 say not one word about Melchisedec's sacrifice ? Yet he neither men- 
 tions that nor anything else that could furnish so much as an iota of 
 evidence to sustain the doctrine of the mass, or remotely insinuate that 
 the bread and wine had any allusion to the unbloody sacrifice of the 
 Roman Church. 
 
 Another passage which Peter Dens cites in favour of the mass, is 
 Mai. i. 11. " From, the rising of the sun to the going down of the same^ 
 my name shall be great among the Gentiles, and in every place a sa- 
 crifice shall be offered in my name for a pure offering." Now as this 
 prophecy relates to Gospel times, of course there must be some sacri- 
 fice in the Christian Church, that may be offered up in every place, 
 and what can this be but the mass ? Sure enough ! To this we 
 answer ; the reading of this text is bad, but the interpretation is worse : 
 the word, which in the Doway is translated sacrifice, properly signifies 
 37 
 
438 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 incense, or any spiritual oblation, and so it is rendered in the Holy 
 Bible. Now both sacrifice and incense are figuratively used in the 
 word of God to denote a purely spiritual oblation. " Let my prayer be 
 set forth before thee as incense, and the lifting up of mine hands, as 
 the evening sacrifice ;" the Psalmist (Ps. cxli. 2.) here speaks of the 
 incense and sacrifice of prayer ; why, therefore, must the word here 
 be understood as alluding to a proper expiatory sacrifice ? In Rev. 
 V. 8. we read ; " the four-and-twenty elders fell down before the Lamb 
 having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, 
 which are the prayers of the saints." By odours we are to understand 
 incense, which is a sweet perfume, and signifies that the prayers of 
 the saints are sweet and acceptable to God. But wherever Christ has 
 a church, " from the rising of the sun to the going down thereof," 
 there the "pure ofiering," and the " incense" of prayer ascend to the 
 mercy seat ; so that this prophecy is literally fulfilled, even though we 
 repudiate the mass, as an unbloody abomination ! 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIX. 
 
 Treatise concerning the Sacrament of Penance. 
 
 Approbation. 
 
 "Many truly excellent theologians have hitherto thoroughly dis- 
 cussed the matter of the Sacrament of Penance, according to rule ; so 
 that it might appear superfluous to submit it again to the press. They 
 have indeed proposed principles and foundations ; but (saving their 
 peace be it spoken,) the most of them have insisted on speculation 
 rather than on practice. The venerable and most learned D. Arch- 
 presbyter, President of the Archepiscopal Seminary," (Peter Dens,) 
 " being especially solicitous to train for pastoral duties, the theologians 
 committed to his care, insists upon practice more than speculation. 
 And therefore retrenching very many questions of little utility, he 
 teaches the way by which his pupils may be able to lead to true peni- 
 tence. Turning neither to the right hand nor to the left, and hence 
 avoiding on the one hand, the rocks of Scylla, of too great severity, and 
 on the other, the Charybdis of undue indulgence, he pursues the middle 
 way, or the safe path of salvation, and insists steadfastly upon the 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 439 
 
 doctrine of holy mother Church, and the decrees of the apostolic See ; 
 and according to his own and my judgmenrt, whatever he has written 
 or said, he submits entirely to the censorship of the supreme Vicars, 
 of the same holy Mother, and of Christ. In reliance, therefore, upon 
 these foundations, I think without hesitation, that this treatise on pen- 
 ance, and the other connected topics, will be worthy of the public 
 light, and profitable to the readers. Mechlin, September 18th, 1758. 
 
 "J. F. FOPPENS, 
 
 "S. T. L. Metropol. Mechl. Eccl. Canon. Grad. et Archidiac. 
 Libr. Censor." 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 Decree of the Council of Florence, for the in- 
 struction OF THE Armenians. 
 
 ** The fourth sacrament is penance, of which the acts of the peni- 
 tent are, as it were, the matter, and these are distinguished into three 
 parts ; of which the first is, contrition of heart; to which pertains, that 
 he be sorry for the sin committed, with the purpose of not sinning in 
 future. The second is, the confession of the mouth ; to which per- 
 tains, that the sinner confess entirely to his priest, all the sins of which 
 he has any recollection. The third is, satisfaction for the sins accord- 
 ing to the judgment of the priest ; which, indeed, is made principally 
 through prayer, fasting, and alms-giving. The words of absolution, 
 which the priest pronounces, when he says, / absolve thee^ &c., are 
 the form of this sacrament. The minister of this sacrament, is the 
 priest having either the ordinary authority of absolving, or by the 
 commission of a superior. The eflect of this sacrament is absolution 
 from sins." 
 
 Canons of the Council of Trent, concerning Penance. 
 
 " 1. Whoever shall say that penance in the Catholic Church, is not 
 truly and properly a sacrament for the reconciliation of the faithful 
 to God, as oflen as they fall into sins afler baptism, instituted by Christ 
 our Lord ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 "2. Whoever confounding the sacraments, shall say, that baptism 
 itself is the sacrament of penance, .as if these two sacraments were 
 not distinct, and that, therefore, penance is not rightly termed, a second 
 plank after shipwreck ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 3. Whoever shall say, that those words of the Lord and Saviour : 
 Receive the Holy Ghost ; whose sins you shall forgive, they are for- 
 given them, and whose sins ye shall retain, they are retained : are not 
 to be understood of the power of remitting and retaining sins in tb» 
 
440 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 sacrament of penance, as the Catholic Church has always understood, 
 from the beginning : but slmll falsely apply them against the institu- 
 tion of this sacrament, to the authority of preaching the gospel ; let 
 him be accursed I 
 
 " 4. Whoever shall deny, that three acts are required in the penitent 
 for the entire and perfect remission of sins, constituting, as it were, the 
 matter of the sacrament of penance, viz : contrition, confession, and 
 satisfaction, which are called the three parts of penance ; or shall say, 
 that only two are parts of penance, to wit : the terrors by which the 
 conscience is smitten by the sense of sin, and faith, produced by the 
 gospel, or by absolution, whereby the person believes that his sins 
 have been remitted to him by Christ ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 5. Whoever shall affirm, that the contrition, which is produced by 
 examination, enumeration, and detestation of isins, by which any one 
 recounts his years in the bitterness of his soul, pondering the weight, 
 multitude, and baseness of his offences, the loss of eternal happiness, 
 and the desert of eternal damnation, with a resolution of leading a 
 better life, is not true and profitable sorrow, and does not prepare for 
 grace, but makes a man a hypocrite and a greater sinner, and that it 
 is only a forced sorrow, and not free and voluntary ; let him be 
 accursed ! 
 
 *' 6. Whoever shall deny that sacramental confession has either been 
 instituted by divine command, or is necessary to salvation ; or shall 
 say that the mode of secretly confessing to a priest alone, which the 
 Catholic Church always has observed from the beginning, and still 
 observes, is foreign from the institution and command of Christ, and 
 is a human invention ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 7. Whoever shall affirm, that in the sacrament of penance, it is 
 not necessary by divine command, for the remission of sins, to confess 
 all and every mortal sin, of which recollection may be had, with due 
 and diligent premeditation, including secret offences, and those which 
 are against the two last precepts of the decalogue, and the circum- 
 stances which change the species of sin : but that this confession is 
 useful only for the instruction and consolation of the penitent, and 
 was anciently observed, only as a oanonical satisfaction imposed upon 
 him : or shall say, that they who endeavour to confess all their sins, 
 wish to leave nothing for the divine mercy to pardon ; or finally, that 
 it is not proper to confess venial sins ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 8. Whoever shall say, that the confession of all sins, such as the 
 Church observes, is impossible, and that it is a human tradition, to be 
 abolished by the pious ; or that all and every one of Christ's faithful, 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 441 
 
 of both sexes, are not bound to observe it once in the year, according 
 to the constitution of the great Lateran council, and that for this rea- 
 son, Christ's faithful should be advised not to confess in the time of 
 Lent ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 ••9. Whoever shall say, that the sacramental absolution of the priest 
 is not a judicial act, but a mere ministry to pronounce and declare, 
 that sins are remitted to the person making confession, provided that 
 he only believes that he is absolved, even though the priest should not 
 absolve seriously, but in joke ; or shall say, that the confession of a 
 penitent is not requisite, in order that the priest may absolve hita; let 
 him be accursed ! 
 
 " 10. Whoever shall say, that priests who are living in mortal sin 
 do not possess the pov<rer of binding and loosing ; or that the priests 
 are not the only ministers of absolution, but that it was said to all and 
 every one of Christ's faithful : Whatsoever you shall bind upon earthy 
 shall be bound also in heaven ; and whatsoever you shall loose upon 
 earth, shall be loosed also in heaven ; and whose sins you shall forgive^ 
 they are forgiven, and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained: 
 by virtue of which words, any one may forgive sin ; public sins, by 
 reproof only, if the offender shall acquiesce ; and private sins, by vol- 
 untary confession ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 11. Whoever shall say that bishops have not the right of reserving 
 cases to themselves, except such as relate to the external polity of the 
 Church, and therefore that the reservation of cases does not hinder the 
 priest from truly absolving from reserved cases ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 12. Whoever shall say that the whole penalty, together with the 
 guilt, is always remitted by God, and that the satisfaction of penitents 
 is nothing else than the faith by which they apprehend that Christ has 
 satisfied for them ; let him be arccursed ! 
 
 " 13. Whoever shall say that satisfaction is by no means made to 
 God, through Christ's merits, for sins as to their temporal penalty, by 
 punishments inflicted by him, and patiently borne, or enjoined by the 
 priests, though not undergone voluntarily, as fastings, prayers, alms, 
 or also other works of piety, and therefore that the best penance is no- 
 thing more than a new life ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 14. Whoever shall say that the satisfactions by which penitents 
 redeem themselves from sin through Jesus Christ, are no part of the 
 service of God, but traditions of men, obscuring the doctrine concern- 
 ing grace, and the true worship of God, and the actual benefit of 
 Christ's death ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 " 15. Whoever shall say that the keys of the Church were given 
 37* 
 
442 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 only for loosing, not also for binding, and that therefore, the priests 
 when they impose punishments upon those who confess, act against 
 the design of the keys, and contrary to the institution of Christ ; and 
 that it is a fiction, that when by virtue of the keys the eternal penalty 
 has been removed, the temporal punishment may still often remain to 
 be suJSered ; let him be accursed !" 
 
 Penance is defined as " a sacrament of the new law, by 
 which absolution of sins is given by a priest having Juris- 
 diction, to baptized persons who have relapsed, are contrite, 
 and have made confessionJ^ This sacrament is known by 
 various names ; the Council of Trent terms it, the second 
 plank after shipwreck; and it is also commonly called con- 
 fession, from its material part. (No. 1.) 
 
 It is PROVED to be a sacrament, 1. From the Councils of 
 Florence and of Trent, by which an anathema is inflicted on 
 all who deny that penance is a sacrament. And 2. From 
 the words of Christ ; Receive the Holy Ghost ; whose sins 
 you shall forgive they are forgiven to them, and whose ye 
 retain they are retained. John xx. 22. In which words 
 Christ designated all things that are essential for the sacra- 
 ment of penance ; he designated the minister, when he con- 
 ceded this power to the apostles only, whom he addressed ; 
 the ybrm of the sacrament is indicated in the words, you 
 shall forgive, by which is intimated that the remission 
 should be effected by the words of the priest ; the remote 
 matter is expressed by the word, sins; contrition, or the dis- 
 position is insinuated by the fact that the sins of some peni- 
 tents are to be forgiven, but of others to be retained ; lastly, 
 the confession of every sin in particular is taught by this, 
 that the priests are there constituted judges ; for it is entrusted 
 to their judgment to remit or retain all sins ; but now no one 
 can be a judge in a case that is unknown to him ; therefore 
 he ought to know the offences ; but he cannot become 
 acquainted with them except through the sinner's own con- 
 fession ; because the sinner alone knows the offences, inas- 
 much as they are in his conscience ; therefore his confession 
 is requisite in order that the confessor may judge of the of- 
 fences as they are in the sinner's conscience. To the 
 objection that God alone can forgive sins, the reply is made 
 that God alone can remit principally, and by his own au- 
 thority ; but the priests forgive ministerially. (No. 2.) 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 443 
 
 This sacrament was instituted on the very day of the re- 
 surrection. (No. 3.) 
 
 The proximate matter of the penitent, consists of the three 
 acts of contrition, confession and satisfaction. The remote 
 matter comprises any sins whatever, committed after bap- 
 tism. (No. 5.) 
 
 The remote matter is divided into necessary ^ and optional, 
 or sufficient. The necessary remote matter consists of all 
 mortal sins, and the optional, (so called because it is left to- 
 the choice of the penitent, whether he will express them or 
 not in confession,) includes all venial offences. (Nos. 6 and 7.) 
 
 It is considered beneficial to confess these also. (No. 9.) 
 
 The form is, / absolve thee from thy sins, in the name 
 of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 
 The essential words are, I absolve thee. (No. 13.) 
 
 " The sense is this : I judicially confer upon thee the grace 
 of the remission of thy sins, or grace in itself procuring the 
 remission of thy sins,. in so far as respects my ministry. 
 This sense of the form cannot be admitted : I declare thee 
 absolved ; because it was condemned by Council of Trent." 
 (No. 14.) 
 
 It is proper to use " these and similar conditions, as the 
 case may require ; If thou art alive, if thou art baptized, 
 if thou hast sinned, if thou art capable of the use of reason ; 
 Daelman adds. If thou art a Catholic : but it is enough to 
 understand these internally and intentionally." (No. 16.) 
 
 This sacrament is necessary in fact or in desire, as a 
 means to justification and salvation for those who have re- 
 lapsed into mortal sin, after baptism. (No. 21.) 
 
 Penance may be repeated till seventy times seven, that is, 
 as often as the sinner sins and repents. (No. 22.) 
 
 Public penances, which were formerly customary, were 
 distinguished as ceremonial and not ceremonial ; the latter 
 were frequently repeated, but the former was performed only 
 once in a lifetime. (No. 23.) 
 
 The ceremonies which are observed at the sacrament of 
 penance, are as follows ; " First, the confessor in imparting 
 his blessing to the kneeling penitent, says : The Lord be in 
 thy heart, and in thy lips, that thou may est worthily con- 
 fess thy sins : in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
 and of the Holy Ghost. Presently the confessor may in- 
 
444 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 quire, how long it is since he has confessed, &c. Having 
 heard the confession, and the necessary questions and exami- 
 nation being finished, the confessor will endeavour to ex- 
 cite the penitent to true sorrow of contrition, above all 
 from the motive of the love of God. Thus the pastorale. 
 Lastly, he will enjoin salutary and convenient satisfaction. 
 
 " Afterwards let the priest say : May Almighty God 
 have mercy on thee, and having remitted thy sins, lead thee 
 through to eternal life. Amen. Then, having raised his 
 right hand towards the penitent, let him say: May the 
 Almighty and merciful Lord give to thee the indulgence, 
 absolution, and remission of thy sins. Amen. May our 
 Lord Jesus Christ absolve thee : Thus far the prayers and 
 invocations are preparatory : the absolution from censures 
 follows : And I, by his authority, loose thee from every bond 
 of excommunication, suspension, and interdict, in so far as 
 I am able and thou hast need. If the penitent is a layman, 
 the word, suspension, is omitted. Then follows the sacra- 
 mental absolution, or the form of the sacrament : I absolve 
 thee from thy sins, in the name of the Father, and of the 
 Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. The confessor subjoins 
 the following prayer. May the passion of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, the merits of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and of all 
 the saints, whatever good thou hast done, or whatever evil 
 thou hast suffered, be to thee for the remission of sins, the 
 increase of grace, and the reward of eternal life. Amen. 
 The rituals permit that, for certain reasons, the said prayers 
 and invocations may be omitted ; so that in extreme neces- 
 sity it may briefly be said : / absolve thee from censures 
 and sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and 
 of the Holy Ghost. Amen." (No. 24.) 
 
 There are six grades by which sinners are ordinarily 
 led to repentance. The first is a motion of divine grace, 
 according to Jer. xxxi. 19. After thou didst convert me, 
 I DID PENANCE. The second is a motion of faith, accord- 
 ing to Heb. xi. 6. He that comes to God must believe. 
 The third is the fear of punishment : Eccle. i. 27. The 
 fear of the Lord driveth out sin. The fourth is an act of 
 hope : Matt. ix. 2. Son, be of good heart, thy sins are 
 forgiven thee. The fifth is an act of the love of God, by 
 which they begin to love God as the fountain of all Jus- 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 445 
 
 tice : Cone. Trid. The sixth is the proper act of penance, 
 viz., SorroiD, or contrition, through some hatred and detest- 
 ation against sins, as injurious to God, with a resolution of 
 beginning a new life, to which in the New Law, the desire 
 of baptism or of the sacrament of penance is necessarily to 
 be connected." (No. 27.) 
 
 The effects of penance are : "1. The remission of sins, 
 and of eternal punishment, and of all temporal punishment. 
 
 2. The revival of virtues, and of good works, or merits. 
 But besides the abovementioned these effects are assigned. 
 
 3. Sanctifying grace which is imparted by the power of the 
 sacrament through the due administration. 4. Also, sacra- 
 mental graces from the due administration, or actual graces ; 
 also such as are to be given subsequently in order to per- 
 form works of penance, to avoid sins, to overcome tempta- 
 tions, &c. 5. There is wont at times, says Council of 
 Trent, sess. 14. c. 3. to follow peace and security of con- 
 science with very great spiritual consolation." (No. 29.) 
 
 So long as a man is in the state of probation, all sins 
 whatever may be remitted through penance. (No. 30.) 
 
 When a fault is forgiven, the guilt of eternal punishment 
 is always removed ; but the whole temporal penalty is not 
 always remitted, and must be expiated here, or in another 
 period, or in purgatory. This point sectarians assail, be- 
 cause it involves the necessity of admitting purgatory, indul- 
 gences, and works of satisfaction. As proofs of the truth 
 of the Romish doctrine, we are referred to the Council of 
 Trent, and 2 Sam. xii. 18, where David was punished for 
 adultery with the death of the child, after it had been said to 
 him : the Lord hath taken away, or hath forgiven, thy 
 sin; so also ch. xxiv. 15 — for the sin of numbering the 
 people he suffered the plague ; thus Moses, Numb, xxvii. 
 13, was shut out from the promised land : thus Adam was 
 sent out to suffer many calamities, Gen. iii. 17, 18, 19. 
 Sometimes, however, with the fault, all temporal punish- 
 ment may be remitted. (No. 36.) 
 
 The faithful may be delivered from temporal punish- 
 ments : " 1. By baptism, by the sacrifice of the mass, and 
 by sacramental pe'nances by their own power ; also by mar- 
 tyrdom ex privilegio. 2. By indulgences, by the interces- 
 
446 CONCERNING PENANCfi. 
 
 sions of the saints in heaven, and by th^ prayers and satis- 
 factions of just men on earth. 
 
 " 3. By our own good works, and sufferings, disease, and 
 punishments endured from the love of Christ, in a state of 
 sanctifying grace : which may avail, not only by way of 
 pure suffering or satisfaction, but also by way of merit and 
 imputation. The dead in purgatory are freed from their 
 temporal penalties. 1. By their own personal suffering or 
 endurance of punishments: but this endurance does not 
 avail for them by way of merit, but only of satisfaction. 
 2. By the sacrifice of the mass, and indulgences, by the in« 
 tercessions of the saints, and by the good works of just men. 
 Infer from these things that temporal punishments may 
 more numerously, easily and abundantly be taken away in 
 this life than in purgatory : and that he is enriched more 
 than by usury, who takes care to make satisfaction in this 
 life." (No. 37.) 
 
 The remains of sin, such as depraved " habits and cus- 
 toms, corruption, or indisposition of the appetite, passions, 
 fancy, and spirits or humours, ignorance, dulness, blindness 
 of mind, lethargy in respect to spiritual things, trouble of 
 conscience, dread of the future state, &c., are not removed 
 by penance. (No. 38.) 
 
 Contrition is defined as " a sorrow of mind, and detest- 
 ation of a sin committed, with a resolution of not sinning in 
 future." Amongst the rest it is said ; " Our heretics con- 
 tend, that penance does not consist in sorrow for, and detest- 
 ation of past offences, but in a mere reformation for the 
 future: and they bring forward as objections certain pas- 
 sages of sacred Scripture. Is. i. 16. Cease to do evil; 
 Ps. xxxiii. 15. Turn away from evil and do good." 
 (No. 43.) 
 
 The next twenty sections treat of the various divisions, 
 and subdivisions of contrition, and present questions of little 
 or no general interest. 
 
 Of Sacramental Confession. (No. 63.) 
 
 " What is sacramental confession ? It is the voluntary 
 accusation of one's own sins made to a priest having juris- 
 diction, in order to obtain remission of them by virtue of 
 the keys." 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 447 
 
 " By what authority has confession heen introduced ? 
 By positive, divine command, inasmuch as it was instituted 
 by Christ the Lord. It is proved by tradition, and by the 
 definition of the Council of Trent. It is proved also by the 
 words of Christ, John xx. 23, as was proved above. Some 
 with St. Thomas, understand the text, James v. 16 : Con- 
 fess one with another, of sacramental confession. " The 
 Calvinists object that auricular confession was introduced by 
 human authority in the Ath Lateran Council, under In- 
 nocent III. in the thirteenth century. The fathers of the 
 Council of Trent, sess. xiv. c. 5, reply, that this is an empty 
 calumny of the heretics ; but in that council only the time 
 of the annual confession, was determined and commanded ; 
 which had before been already observed in the church. Just 
 reasoning refutes this objection : because it is not conceivable 
 neither is it possible that all men would without any contra- 
 diction have tolerated so heavy a burden as the confession 
 of secret sins, unless holy church had practised it from the 
 beginning by divine command: now no history makes men- 
 tion of a contradiction ; therefore, &c. 
 
 The fact that we find no objection to auricular confession in any 
 early ecclesiastical historian effectually establishes one of two things ; 
 it proves either that the church generally was satisfied that it was a 
 divine institution, or else, that nobody knew any thing at all about it ; 
 of the two we suppose the latter to be the more probable. 
 
 " Ohj. Nectarius the bishop of Constantinople abrogated 
 confession in the fourth contury ; as Socrates and Sozome- 
 nus relate : therefore confession is not of divine institution. 
 Ans. Baronius accuses their histories of falsehood. The 
 usual answer is, that in this instance sacramental confession 
 was not abrogated, but public confession before the people, 
 or perhaps only the public confession of secret sins, or the 
 mere mention of an accomplice ; from the occasion that a 
 certain noble woman through an indiscreet zeal had publicly 
 confessed a sin with a deacon in the temple, from which 
 public confession, scandal and murmuring of the people had 
 resulted. In the west however, the practice of public con- 
 fession lasted till beyond the sixth century." 
 
 " What benefits does the confession of sins afford? Be- 
 side the effects mentioned (No. 29.) it affords the following 
 advantages : 1. Proper counsels and remedies against sins are 
 
448 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 received from the confessor. 2. Through the shame and 
 humiliation of confession, it serves usefully for some Httle 
 satisfaction for past offences, and for restraining from future 
 sins. Sacramental confession was prefigured in this that 
 Christ, Matt. viii. 4, sent the lepers to the priests : also that 
 under the old law, sinners were compelled to go to the 
 priests to offer sacrifices for their sins. And what is more, 
 Corn, a Lapide thinks that under the old law there was an 
 obligation to confess all sins to the priests : and he proves 
 this by the variety of the sacrifices for sins. The multifari- 
 ous expiations and purifications in the old law were figures 
 of the sacrament of penance." 
 
 Sacramental confession is enjoined both by a divine and 
 ecclesiastical precept. It is obligatory upon every baptized 
 person who is conscious of having committed mortal sin. 
 (No. 64.) 
 
 According to a decree of a Lateran council : " Every one 
 of the faithful of both sexes, after he {or she) shall have 
 reached the years of discretion, must faithfully confess 
 all his (or her) sins, alone, at least once a year to the 
 proper priest, iSfc. Which the council of Trent has con- 
 firmed, sess. xiv. c. 5 and 8, and which is commonly recited 
 among the five precepts of the church." (No. 16.) 
 
 It is sufficient if this is done in any part of the year ; but 
 the custom of the faithful fixes the time at i^laster, and the 
 synod of Mechlin has resolved that they cannot be admitted 
 to the sacrament who have not confessed in Lent, and this 
 mode of confessing in Lent the council of Trent approves. 
 (No. 67.) 
 
 " Who are under obligation by the ecclesiastical pre- 
 cept of confession ? All baptized persons who have attained 
 to years of discretion and have sinned. When may they be 
 presumed to have reached those years of discretion ? 
 When they have attained to such a use of reason that they 
 are able to discern between moral good and evil, &c." 
 
 " Boys are presumed to have reached this period of the 
 use of reason, usually about the seventh or eighth year of 
 their age: some sooner, others later: for a discrepancy 
 occurs according to the development of the brain, and educa- 
 tion and practice : Greg. Bk. iv. Dial. c. xviii. tells of a 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 449 
 
 boy five years old condemned for blasphemy : so that some- 
 times it may be proper to say with St. Augustine : So little 
 a boy, and so great a sinner. Therefore even very young 
 children may profitably be sent to a confessor, in order that 
 the priest may judge of their discretion, and the boys them- 
 selves may learn and become accustomed to confess. In 
 truth this" is a great part of the pastoral care, that a pastor 
 on every Lord's day, should allure some of the little children 
 to the confessional, whom he may hear whilst others who 
 are adults do not come ; for he who wishes to reform a parish 
 and bring it to better fruit, must begin with the children. 
 " Are children therefore of eight or nine years to be sa- 
 cramentally absolved every year 1 Yes, and oftener, if they 
 are found to have committed afl|:ions mortally sinful." • The 
 precept of confession is obligatory at an earlier period than 
 that of communion. (No. 68.) 
 
 If a child concerning whom it is doubtful whether he has 
 attained to years of discretion, is in danger of death, he should 
 be absolved on the condition. If thou hast sinned, or if thou 
 art capable, and in a similar condition the sacrament of 
 extreme unction, may also be conferred. But if the sins of 
 a child are such, as to be mortal, and he has attained to years 
 of discretion, it is necessary to endeavour to produce the 
 proper disposition, and absolve him on the condition, If thou 
 hast sinned, &c. (No. 69.) 
 
 Deaf and dumb persons are also obliged to confess by 
 signs, &c. (No. 70.) 
 
 Whether the precept of annual confession is of obligation 
 in the case of those who have committed only venial offences, 
 is a controverted point ; but the affirmative opinion is to be 
 practically followed. (No. 71.) 
 
 " What is the punishment of those who transgress the 
 ecclesiastical precept of annual confession 7 These things 
 are decreed in the chapter, Every one of both sexes, <^c. 
 Living, let him be sequestered from the threshold of the 
 church, and dying, let him be deprived of Christian burial : 
 that is to say, when these two things concur, that this omis- 
 sion is notorious, and that at the close of life he has given 
 no signs of sorrow ; which is inferred from the Roman 
 ritual. The punishment of one who does not commune at 
 Easter is the same. Tliis punishment is not, properly speak- 
 38 
 
450 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 ing, excommunication, but as it were, a certain part of it, as 
 Steyaert says." (No. 72.) 
 
 Frequent confession is advised. (No. 73.) 
 
 " Sixteen conditions of a legitimate confession are wont 
 to be mentioned by St. Thomas, and the doctors, which are 
 contained in these four lines — 
 
 " Sit simplex, humilis confessio, pura, fidelis, 
 Atque frequens, nuda et discreta, libens, verecunda, 
 Integra, secreta, et lacrymabilis, accelerata, 
 Fortis, et accusans, et sit parere parata. 
 
 Let the confession be simple, humble, pure, faithful, 
 
 And frequent, naked and discreet, ready, modest. 
 
 Entire, secret, and tearful, rapid. 
 
 Bold, and accusing, and let u be prepared to obey." (No. 75.) 
 
 " How great a si?i does he commit who speaks a false- 
 hood in confession ? If he lies, accusing himself of a 
 mortal sin which he has not committed, or denying a mor- 
 tal sin which he has committed, and which ought to be ex- 
 pressed in this confession, he commits a mortal sacrilege ; 
 because, in a serious matter he perverts sacramental judg- 
 ment. However, the sincerity of scrupulous and good 
 minds is not to be at once severely blamed : for those per- 
 sons wishing not to deceive, but to choose more securely, 
 accuse themselves more severely. If any one lies in con- 
 fession, saying that he has committed a venial sin which he 
 has not committed, and that venial offence is the only mat- 
 ter of absolution, he commits mortal sacrilege : because he 
 renders absolution, or the sacrament invalid. But if in the 
 same confession he confesses other sins which he has com- 
 mitted, with due contrition for them, the sacrament seems to 
 be valid, and this falsehood to be only venial sacrilege : be- 
 cause the deception is not in an important thing, neither in the 
 entire nor in the proximate matter." (No. 76.) 
 
 Hypocrisy in confession is a mortal sin. (No. 77.) 
 The integrity of the confession is distinguished as mate- 
 rial and formal. " That confession is called materially en- 
 tire, in which all and every mortal sin committed after bap- 
 tism, as well internal as external, not yet directly and 
 legitimately subjected to sacramental absolution, is exposed 
 to one and the same confessor, in order to one and the same 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 451 
 
 sacramental absolution. A confession is called formally 
 entire, when after a diligent examination of the conscience, 
 all mortal sins committed since baptism, and not yet directly 
 and legitimately subjected to the keys, and which must and 
 may be expressed here and now in this confession, are 
 revealed to one and the same confessor ; although, perhaps 
 something may be omitted for a legitimate cause; v. g.,.when 
 any one confesses two sins, and from blameless inadvertency, 
 omits a third." " Formal integrity is sufficient, and this is 
 also absolutely necessary ; so that a confession not formally 
 entire, is invalid and sacrilegious." (No. 78.) 
 
 An accomplice in crime must be revealed in confession, 
 when the integrity of the confession requires it ; but if he 
 can confess his own sins without it, the penitent ought not 
 to mention an accomplice. (No. 80.) 
 
 The examination of a conscience is defined thus : It is 
 the reconsideration of committed sins, by a diligent discus- 
 sion of the conscience, hy applying the understanding to 
 know, and the memory to recollect. (No. 81.) 
 
 *' Why ought the number of sins to be expressed in con- 
 fession? 1. In order that all sins may be revealed ; 2. And 
 that the condition, custom, affection, danger, &c., of the 
 penitent may be learned." He does not confess properly, 
 who says, I have sometimes, or often committed this sin, 
 because he does not express a fixed number. If he does not 
 know the precise number, he ought to express the more pro- 
 bable one, by saying, v. g., I have done it twenty times, 
 more or less. If the penitent is ignorant, and cannot even 
 tell the probable number, the confessor must help him, by 
 inquiring, how often in a month, or in a week, or in a day, 
 he has committed the sin ; and then for how many days, 
 months, or years, he has continued in those sins, &c. In a 
 case of hatred, he ought to declare the number of persons 
 whom he hates ; so in a case of detraction, because there 
 are just as many sins as there are persons. (No. 84, ana 
 corollary.) 
 
 All CIRCUMSTANCES which change the kind of the sin, 
 and which materially aggravate or diminish it, are to be 
 mentioned in confession ; because, unless this is done, sins 
 are not entirely declared by penitents ; and the confessors, 
 who are judges of the grievousness of crimes, cannot ascer- 
 
452 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 tain their degree without it, nor impose the proper penance ; 
 besides, a person concealing such a circumstance, may omit 
 a mortal sin in confession ; suppose, for instance, that some 
 one who is bound by a vow of chastity, confesses fornica- 
 tion, but is silent on the circumstance of his vow. (No. 86.) 
 The confessor must interrogate the penitent, for 
 this his office of physician, judge and counsellor, requires. 
 The Mechlin pastorale cautions priests not to detain any one, 
 particularly young people of both sexes, with inquisitive or 
 useless questions : and not imprudently to interrogate others 
 about things of which they know nothing, lest they might 
 occasion scandal, and their penitent might learn to sin. "If 
 the priest observes that the penitent is silent from shame or 
 fear, it is proper to begin the interrogations from the greater, 
 by proposing to the same, the question, v. g., whether he 
 has committed homicide, or adultery, or a sacrilegious theft, 
 &c., because then the penitent will promptly reply, that it is 
 not so enormous a crime, and he will venture to make known 
 his sin, which is less, that he may avoid the suspicion of the 
 greater. But if the penitent may be supposed to omit the 
 sin from ignorance or simplicity, questions are put from the 
 less, lest perchance, he may learn to sin. Schema 8, affords 
 an example of this. How shall a confessor conduct him- 
 self toioards those, who confess nothing unless they are 
 asked 7 If this happens through neglect of examination, 
 they are ordinarily to be sent back to a diligent examination 
 of conscience, and they are to be admonished to be sorry, 
 and blame themselves for the neglect. But if it proceeds 
 from bashfulness, timidity, simplicity, or from the rudeness 
 of uncultivated nature, they are to be kindly and patiently 
 received and assisted. Hence, those confessors commit no 
 small deviation from the path of prudent judgment, who, 
 when some simple, and perhaps pious person, says .in con- . 
 fession ; Sir, I do not know what to confess, confound and 
 ironically insult him, by saying; I will put you on the altar, 
 because you are holy, for you have not sinned," &c. 
 (No. 90.) 
 
 OP interrogations in particular. 
 
 " Concerning what things may the confessor interrogate 
 a penitent 7 1 . How long ago, or since what time he has 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 453 
 
 confessed ? 2. What is his condition, (unless it should be 
 known), that is to say, whether he is married, bound by a 
 vow, the master of a household, a merchant, labourer, &c., 
 in order that he may be interrogated about sins usually com- 
 mitted in such a state. 3. Whether he has performed the 
 penance imposed. 4. Whether he has regularly and entirely 
 confessed at other times. 5. Whether he has previously, 
 diligently scrutinized or examined his conscience as he 
 ought. 6. Whether he has learned the rudiments and arti- 
 cles of faith, and other things necessary to be known. 7. If 
 the penitent has not expressed the number, and kinds, and 
 circumstances, of the sins necessary to be explained, let the 
 priest prudently ask him. Moreover, lest the confessor 
 should be embarrassed in investigating the circumstances of 
 any sin, let him have this little line of circumstances in 
 readiness. 
 
 " Who, what, where, by what helps, why, how, when. 
 
 "But what may be denoted by each of these particles, is 
 compendiously explained at the close of the practical Sche- 
 mata, at the end of this volume." (No. 91.) 
 
 Probably the very best idea of the character of the Romish doctrine 
 and practice of confession, will be afforded by the translation of these 
 practical exemplifications of the orthodox mode of ransacking the 
 conscience of a penitent. I shall, therefore, present them without 
 delay. But first observe : 
 
 " Sacramental confession ought regularly to be made by 
 proper word of mouth ; because this mode is the most per- 
 fect, and involves greater humility and bashfulness : add to 
 this, that it has been the perpetual practice of the Church. 
 When, however, the penitent has not the use of his tongue, 
 or some other reason exists, a confession by writing, or by 
 any kind of nods and signs, is sufficient," &c. A confes- 
 sion may also, in case of necessity, be made by an interpre- 
 ter; but a penitent is not obliged to make such a confession. 
 (No. 93.) 
 
 38* 
 
454 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 PRACTICAL MODELS. 
 
 " A method of interrogating a penitent, who confesses in an igno- 
 rant manner, not sufficiently explaining the object, number and cir- 
 cumstances. 
 
 The penitent confesses : I have sworn. 
 
 Confessor. What words did you say ? Penitent. By my soul what 
 I assert is true : I did not use any other forms of swearing. Conf. 
 How often ? Pen. Seven times from the time of the last confession, 
 made at the festival of the Lord's nativity. Conf. Did you say it from 
 habit ? or from an unpremeditated impulse ? or deliberately ? Pen. 
 Deliberately enough, but not from habit. 
 
 Examination concerning the addition of truth. 
 Conf. Did you swear contrary to the truth ? Pen. I have once con- 
 firmed a falsehood by a positive oath. Conf. Did you know that it 
 was false, when you swore ? Pen. Yes, I knew it. Conf. You have 
 committed a grievous sin of perjury ; besides if you can and ought to 
 foresee or fear that losses, scandals, or any bad results will follow, de- 
 clare them, and tell which of them have already resulted : make amends 
 for the injuries inflicted, remove the bad results, and if some will still 
 follow, you ought to prevent them. Pen. Nothing of these, for it was 
 a lie spoken in jest, which I confirmed with an. oath. Conf. Have 
 you fulfilled your promissory oaths, with which you swore that you 
 would do something ? Pen. Once I did not fulfil, through negligence. 
 Conf. What had you sworn ? Pen, I had sworn to pay a debt of ten 
 florins, within three days, and I delayed it beyond a month. Conf. 
 Did not the other consent to the delay, at least implicitly ? Or did not 
 other claims excuse you, by which the obligation of an oath sometimes 
 ceases ? Pen. No. Conf. You have sinned grievously, and you will 
 pay the debt as soon as possible. Pen. I will do so. Conf. Could it 
 be foreseen that any injuries or other bad results would follow ? Pen. 
 None. Conf. When you swore, had you the intention of fulfilling the 
 oath? Pen. I thought it would be impossible within three days. 
 Conf. Therefore accuse yourself farther of formal perjury from the 
 defect of formal virtue. 
 
 Examination concerning the addition of justice. 
 Conf. Did you swear anything unlawful or not decent ? v. g., that 
 you would inflict injury on any one ? Pen. Yes, once. Conf. What 
 was it? Pen. I swore that I would break my neighbour's arm. 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 455 
 
 CoNF. Had you the intention of doing it, when you s?wore ? Pen. Yes. 
 CoNF. You have grievously offended against religion and against jus- 
 tice : it is not lawful for you to fulfil what you have sworn : in addi- 
 tion, tell for what length of time you persisted in this bad intention of 
 doing injuries, and what harm must be apprehended as likely to result. 
 Pen. &c. 
 
 II. 
 CONCERNING HABITUAL SWEARERS. 
 Pen. I have sworn in saying : Par Dieu. Conf. How often ? Pen. 
 Two hundred times, more or less, in the time of two months, during 
 which I have not confessed. Conf. Therefore you labour under the 
 habit of swearing ? Pen. Yes. Conf. Did you use other words or 
 forms ? Pen. No. Conf. Do you swear indiscriminately truth and 
 falsehood, things lawful and unlawful ? Pen. From habit I speak for 
 the most part before I maturely examine them. Conf. Therefore the 
 most of your oaths are mortal sins, on account of the danger of swear- 
 ing that which is false or unlawful. How often have you sworn con- 
 trary to truth ? Pen. Certainly at least ten times, and once I swore 
 knowingly to a falsehood, by a positive oath. Conf. Did you fulfil 
 what you swore you would do ? Pen. Five times I did not fulfil it 
 in a small matter ; but people did not accept my oaths, because they 
 knew that I swear habitually. Conf. How often have you sworn 
 something unlawful, or not decent, in addition against justice ? Pen. 
 About six times, that I might vindicate myself for refusing the com- 
 mon offices of charity to another. Conf. Did any, and what injuries 
 or losses ensue, or were they to be apprehended, especially scandals in 
 regard to children and domestics, who usually hear and imitate? 
 Pen. None, except perhaps general scandal in the hearers ; for 1 have 
 no children or domestics. Conf. How long has this habit continued ? 
 Pen. Now, five years. Conf. How often have you confessed in that 
 time ? Pen. Three times every year. Conf. What means have con- 
 fessors prescribed to you ? Pen. That I should read one Ave Maria 
 as often as I swore. Conf. Did you observe this ? Pen. Whenever 
 I remembered : very often. Conf. St. Francis Sales teaches that ab- 
 solution must be delayed, because you do not stretch every nerve to 
 eradicate the vicious habit. Therefore return after eight days, and 
 meanwhile use these more efficacious means, «&c. Besides, the pre- 
 ceding confessions are to me very doubtful as to their value, and must 
 therefore be repeated, because in the whole time of the voluntary 
 habit, you have persevered in the intention and desire of sinning, and 
 thus you have committed as many sacrileges as you liavc received sa- 
 
456 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 craments. Therefore you will institute an examination of your con- 
 science concerning them, and a general confession from the time that 
 the habit has commenced. Did you not certainly sometimes do better 
 for a considerable time after confession, by very great anxiety to eradi- 
 cate the habit ? Pen. I did not pay special regard." 
 
 More efficacious means against the habit of swearing. 
 " They are those, which remove precipitation, and produce delibera- 
 tion. 1. At every oath, let him immediately say openly : I retract 
 what I said, I am sorry for it, and I will say so no more, &c. This 
 is best if it can be obtained, because by thus publicly retracting, the 
 person swearing repairs the scandal, which he occasioned. 2. Let him 
 immediately recite Pater noster and Hail Mary, kneel down, or do 
 some other work of penance. 3. Let him immediately put aside from 
 one pocket into another, a farthing, that he may give it to the first 
 poor man whom he meets. 4. Let him ask, that others, companions 
 or servants may immediately reprove him. 5. Every week let him 
 return to the same confessor." 
 
 in. 
 
 OF BLASPHEMIES. 
 
 *' Pen. I have said : Mort Dieu and Sucre Dieu. Conf. From cus- 
 tom, and how often ? Pen. Both, three times, not from custom, but 
 from levity. Conf. Did you commit six crimes of blasphemy ? Pen. 
 I have sometimes heard it said that these are enormous oaths. Conf. 
 Did you say these things by way of oath, in order to affirm or deny 
 something, and this in addition against truth and justice ? Pen. No. 
 Conf. Did scandal, or any other evil follow, or was it at least to be 
 feared? Pen. No. 
 
 " If the penitent is an habitual blasphemer, let him be treated as in 
 Schema II. ; if bad results have followed, &c., as in I." 
 
 Appendix. 
 
 " Pen. I have said : Par Dieu and Mort Dieu. 
 
 " In this case each must be examined separately : for par Dieu de- 
 notes a simple oath : mort Dieu also contains blasphemy, therefore the 
 confessor will ask : How often did you say, par Dieu ? How often 
 mort Dieu ? &c. But if this swearer is such a one who babbles out 
 indiscriminately, mort Dieu, or par Dieu, whichever first comes into 
 his mouth, without any difference, he will be guilty of blasphemy in 
 each act, even when he pronounces only par Dieu, because in every 
 act, he was ready for either one or the other." 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 457 
 
 • IV. 
 
 OF A PROXIMATE OCCASION. 
 " Pen. I have been drunk. Conf. How often ? Pen. I am ac- 
 justomed to be drunk five or six times in a month. Conf. Were you 
 quite drunk, destitute of the use of reason ? Pen. So that I was inca- 
 pacitated even for common business. Conf. From what occasion do 
 these drunken excesses happen ? Pen. From frequenting the tavern. 
 Conf. Frequenting the tavern is to you the proximate occasion of sin. 
 How often did you thus enter the tavern, even if you were not drunk ? 
 Pen. About ten times a month : for I am accustomed to enter the 
 tavern sixteen times every month, and out of these I am used to be 
 drunk six times more or less. Conf. In these ten times also, you are 
 guilty before God of the sin of drunkenness, because you exposed your- 
 self to danger. You may elicit fresh contrition for these, and accuse 
 yourself of them in confession. Have bad results followed, or will 
 they follow, or were they at least to be feared, which you could and 
 should have foreseen ? Or indeed do any usually follow ? Pen. No : 
 for when drunk, I am good and peaceable. Conf. For how long a 
 time have you frequented the proximate occasion ? Pen. Now for a 
 year. Conf. Therefore, for a year you have lived in the desire or in- 
 tention of sinning mortally : therefore you will institute a general con- 
 fession of this time; you will accuse yourself besides of having sacri- 
 legiously taken the sacraments, &c." 
 
 A VOLUNTARY OCCASION. 
 " CoNF. Do you frequent from necessity, or indeed without any just 
 cause ? Pen. My profit is from it, for I am the agent of another man's 
 affairs, which must be carried on in the tavern. Conf. Have preced- 
 ing confessors prescribed to you efficacious means that this occasion 
 might become remote ? Pen. Yes : but I know from experience that 
 I cannot be kept from these drunken excesses by any means. Conf. 
 Therefore yott will absolutely quit frequenting taverns : and for this 
 reason you will give up that office, and assume another business to 
 gain a livelihood : if you will not I can not absolve you. Besides you 
 will institute a general confession from the time at which you volun- 
 tarily retained the proximate occasion, &c. Pen. Ought I therefore 
 to retrench my mode of living ? Conf. You must retrench it : be- 
 cause just reasons for retaining a voluntary proximate cause can 
 not be given." 
 
458 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 AN OCCASION MORALLY INVOLUNTARY. 
 
 "CoNF. Do you frequent from necessity, or indeed without any just 
 cause ? Pen. From necessity, because I am an agent, and in this 
 way only do I know how to gain the livelihood necessary for my wife 
 and children, so that I cannot give it up except to my serious loss : 
 and I may fall perhaps into greater dangers. Conf. Have you in the 
 mean time confessed, and have means been prescribed to you ? Pen. 
 No. Conf. Therefore, employ means by which the occasion may 
 become remote : you must not drink in the tavern, or you must drink 
 only a single pint, and you must mix with it if you conveniently can, bit- 
 ter herbs, or you must drink water under another pretext. If drink be 
 offered you by others, you must refuse, or else pretend that you are 
 drinking it. You must return after eight days. Meanwhile pray 
 earnestly to God, &c." 
 
 V. 
 
 CONCERNING DETRACTION. 
 " A method of interrogating a penitent in sins of detraction, who 
 confesses without expression of object or circumstances. 
 
 EXAMINATION CONCERNING A FALSE STATEMENT. 
 " Pen. I have spoken slander. Conf. Is what you have said true or 
 false ? Pen. What I said is false. Conf. Is it a very disgraceful 
 defect : or is it materially against the fame or good reputation of this 
 person ? Pen. I think so. Conf. What then did you say ? Pen. 
 That a certain respectable girl had committed fornication. Conf. 
 How often did you say this ? and to how many persons ? Pen. 
 To three persons at one time. Conf. Have they divulged it to others ? 
 Pen. It is so : for they are talkative and loquacious, and receive slander 
 greedily. Conf. To how many persons ? Pen. I do not know ; per- 
 haps to ten people. Conf. You will immediately hinder any farther 
 infamy, and personally or through others restore the good name with 
 all those, to whom you or others have divulged it. Pen. How shall 
 I do this ? Conf. By recalling it, and asserting that you have spo- 
 ken that which was false, and that you are prepared to take an oath 
 upon it, and to bring witnesses, &c. Will you do it ? Pen. Yes I 
 will. Conf. Could and must any losses or other evils be foreseen and 
 feared, and have in reality any followed or will they still follow ? Pen. 
 Yes. Conf. Tell what they are, and also those which have not yet . 
 followed and which will not follow, but which you could and must fear 
 will follow : but those which have followed, amend, and take Uway 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 459 
 
 the evils : just as you will be obliged to make restitution for what will 
 follow, unless you prevent them : meanwhile take care that you pre- 
 vent. Pen. It is well, &c. Conf. Did the detraction or infamy extend 
 to some others, so that they were injured in their reputation also ? 
 Pen. Yes truly, I mentioned an accomplice with whom she had com- 
 mitted fornication. Conf. Of what condition, quality and reputation 
 was this accomplice ? Pen. He was not situated in high life, but a 
 married man ; an honest citizen of the common sort, having a respect- 
 able wife and children. Conf. This is another slander. You must 
 make restitution, &c. The rest must be investigated as above." 
 
 EXAMINATION CONCERNING A TRUE STATEMENT. 
 "Conf. Is what you have said true or false ? Pen. What I said is 
 true. Conf. And was it public by the publicity of the fact or right ? 
 Had you just reasons for revealing it? Pen. No. Conf. Is the 
 failing very disgraceful with respect to that person ? Pen. It seems 
 so. Conf. What then have you said ? Pen. That a certain girl had 
 committed fornication. Conf. Is she is a respectable girl or of good 
 reputation in this respect? Or is she considered infamous in this 
 thing, because she has frequently committed it ? Or is she a harlot ? 
 &c. Pen. She is acknowledged as respectable. Conf. To how many 
 persons did you reveal it ? Pen. To three at one time. Conf. Have 
 they told it to others ? Or must you not at least fear this danger ? 
 Pen. No : because I knew them to be prudent, and they reproved me. 
 Conf. Notwithstanding this, you have sinned against justice with 
 regard to the girl, and against charity in regard to the hearers by 
 giving them on your part, scandal or occasion that they might sin in 
 listening to your detraction. Could actual injuries or other evils be 
 foreseen as likely to result ? Pen. No. Conf. You must restore the 
 reputation you have injured. Pen. It has already become public and 
 known everywhere. Conf. If it has become public through injury, 
 you are still obliged to make restitution. Has it perhaps become public 
 in some other way? Pen. It is public, because a child has notori- 
 ously been born. Conf. You are liberated from the duty of restitution, 
 but you have certainly sinned because at the time in which you 
 revealed it, the fact was secret, nor was it known that it would bo 
 public." 
 
 VI. 
 
 OF PERSONS HEARING SLANDER. 
 Pen. I have heard slander. Conf. Did you reprove the slanderer ? 
 Or did you hinder the detraction in some other way ? Or did not the 
 
460 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 others do this ? Pen. No. Conf. Had you just reasons for not reprov 
 ing or not hindering, v. g. because it was public, or because no hop? 
 of good effect appeared : or because you feared other injuries or evils ,* 
 or because it was lawfully denounced in order to hinder the evil ? &c. 
 Pen. I had not any reasons to excuse me. Conf. Was it a very dis- 
 graceful fault with respect to this person ? What was related ? And 
 what evils and injuries were to be feared as likely to follow ? Pen. It 
 was told of a servant known to us, that he once stole a silver box ; 
 but no danger of loss or evil seems to be feared from the statement. 
 Conf. How did you behave during this detraction? Were you 
 silent ? Did you listen willingly, and were you secretly pleased ? 
 Did you take part by externally asking, conversing, laughing ? &c." 
 
 Against justice. 
 " Pen. I asked in an inquisitive manner about the circumstances 
 and evidences of the truth of the fact, which the detractor also added. 
 Conf. How many persons were present hearing it ? Pen. We were 
 four who heard it. Conf. Did you communicate it to no one farther ? 
 And did not the others who heard it do so ? Pen. No. Conf. 1.- You 
 have sinned against charity with respect to the slanderer, and the 
 hearers on account of the scandal. 2. You have sinned against jus- 
 tice as co-operating, with respect to the person who was slandered, 
 and, therefore, you are bound to make restitution of the character, 
 losses, &c., if the slanderer or the principals fail, or do not make resti- 
 tution." 
 
 Against charity. 
 
 " Con. Did you join in externally by asking, conversing, laugh- 
 ing ? ^c. Pen. By no means, but I was silent and kept myself nega- 
 tively. Conf. Were you obliged ex officio or from justice to hinder 
 those sins or the infamy ? Pen. No. Conf. You have certainly sin- 
 ned against charity ; 1. in respect of the slanderer, and the hearers, 
 because you did not hinder the sins ; 2. with regard to him, who was 
 slandered, because you did not prevent the injury to the reputation, 
 and the loss of your neighbour ; all of which you could and should 
 prevent from charity." 
 
 VII. 
 
 EXAMINATION CONCERNING THEFT OR INJUSTICE. 
 Pen. I have committed theft. Conf. What have you stolen ? 
 Pen. Seven florins. Conf. Did you take them from necessity, or from 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 461 
 
 some other cause ? Pen. No : but I unjustly took them from a gentle- 
 man whose servant I am. Conf. Did you steal them at one time, or 
 many by small thefts? Pen. At several times in the space of four 
 weeks. Conf. In how many times ? Pen. I do not know. Conf. 
 How much did you take at every time ? Or how often in the week ? 
 Pen. a shilling, at every time. Conf. Was there the desire or 
 inclination of stealing more at each time, if occasion had offered ? 
 Pen. No : but I wished to take a shilling only at each time. Conf. 
 Had you the intention, indeed, from the beginning of attaining to a 
 considerable sum through small thefts ? Pen. Yes. Conf. To how 
 great a sum ? Pen. To the sum of six or seven florins, in order that 
 I might be able to buy a new cap and hose. Conf. Therefore, from 
 the first time you have sinned mortally. During this time, were the 
 internal acts of desire to steal often repeated or renewed, when the 
 deed did not follow ? Pen. Yes, perhaps, fifty times : but I forbore, 
 lest I should be detected. Conf. Have other losses or injuries fol- 
 lowed ? Or must you fear and foresee that they will perhaps fol- 
 low ? Or are other bad circumstances known to you ? Pen. No- 
 thing of these. Conf. Have you made restitution ? Pen. I have not ; 
 nor have I anything which I can restore, except the cap which I have 
 bought. Conf. You have sinned also in this, that you have made 
 yourself unable ; see, however, if you cannot get back the price by 
 returning the cap; otherwise you must every day lay aside something 
 from your daily wages, and you must not enter a tavern unless you 
 have first made restitution. Pen. I will do so. Conf. For how long 
 a time have you remained in this state without interruption, or with- 
 out intention of making restitution ? Pen. For six weeks, namely, 
 until yesterday. Conf. Meanwhile, you have not confessed ? Pen. 
 No. Conf. For so long a time, you have persisted in the desire of the 
 mortal sin, which has been continually done, &c." 
 
 VIII. 
 METHOD OP PRUDENTLY EXAMINING CONCERNING IM- 
 MODEST THOUGHTS. 
 
 " Pen. I have had immodest thoughts. Conf. Did you afford cause 
 or occasion for them by look, words ? &c. Pen. No. Conf. Did 
 you endeavour to repel them? Pen. No. Conf. How long did you 
 voluntarily persist in them ? Pen. Through five Pater et Ave. 
 Conf. How often did this happen? Pen. Once. Conf. Did you 
 take pleasure in tliem ? Pen. I did so. Conf. Did you give your 
 39 
 
462 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 consent to any bad action, or was there any desire or intention of 
 doing a bad action if the opportunity had been offered ? Pen. No : 
 but it was merely a lingering delight, to which I gave my consent. 
 CoNF. About what object, and about what thing was this delight ? 
 Pen. Circa copulam cum filia honesta libera, mihi nulla cognatione 
 vel affinitate juncta I 
 
 CoNF. What are you, single, married, or bound by a vow ? Pen. 
 I am a single young man. Conf. An inde secuteB sunt aliquae com- 
 motiones carnales in corpore ? Pen. Yes. Conf. Did you endeavour 
 to resist these impulses and to repel them ? Pen. No : but I simply 
 permitted them. Conf. An secuta est poUutio? Pen. Yes. Conf. 
 Did you afterwards persist in the thoughts and pleasures ? Pen. No : 
 but I immediately trembled with horror, restrained my emotions, 
 abandoned these thoughts, betook myself to God, and invoked the 
 names of Jesus and Mary." 
 
 AN ADDITION TO SCHEMA VIII. 
 
 " It sometimes happens that young men or girls, attired in a some- 
 what vain manner, and addicted to pleasure and voluptuousness, confess 
 nothing of the temptations of licentiousness, by which however, per- 
 sons of this kind are wont to be assailed. These the confessor will 
 interrogate prudently and by a roundabout method (as St. Thomas 
 advises) beginning with general things thus : 
 
 Conf. Do not indecent thoughts sometimes occur to you? If the 
 penitent answers affirmatively, the confessor may proceed according 
 to the schema ; if negatively, perhaps from ignorance of the wicked- 
 ness, he must proceed to external things more known to the penitent 
 in this mode : Do you sometimes visit persons of the other sex or 
 parties ? Pen. Yes. Conf. Are immodest words or remarks some- 
 times exchanged at such places? Pen. It is so : concerning" » * * 
 [kind reader, excuse me I would give you the Latin, that you might 
 carry it to some holy confessor and ask him to put it into good Saxon 
 for you, but it is too bad to offer even in the original.] 
 
 " Conf. What part did you take ? Pen. I laughed with others, and 
 sometimes added a word. Con. How often did this happen ? This is 
 asked that the number of sins, which is in the actions, may be known. 
 Before what persons ? This is asked because it destroys so many 
 souls, by affording them so many scandals, or at least by positively 
 co-operating with them in laughing and speaking. Conf. Before what 
 kind of persons ? This is demanded that the circumstances of tho 
 scandals may be exposed : which if they have taken place with a 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 463 
 
 person bound by a vow will be sacrilege ; if with a married one, 
 injustice : because he himself becomes guilty of those sins to which 
 they might be induced on account of the scandals. 
 
 CoNF. Did any desires, carnalities, or improper liberties, kisses, &c. 
 follow ? These things are asked, because they are frequently con- 
 nected with the preceding sins. Children are usually asked in this 
 matter : whether they have played indecent games with themselves, 
 or with others ? &,c. 
 
 IX. • 
 
 EXAMINATION CONCERNING DISTRACTIONS IN PRAYER. 
 " Pen. I confessed a month ago. Conf. Very well : what has hap- 
 pened meanwhile? Pen. I have often been distracted in prayer. 
 CoNF. Were these distractions directly voluntary, or indirectly, by 
 affording an occasion or cause ? Pen. I gave occasion by staring 
 about. CoNF. In the prayer of obligation ? Pen. Once in the mass 
 of obligation on the Lord's day. Conf. How long did this distraction 
 last ? Pen. Through half the time of the mass. Conf. Did you not 
 certainly endeavour to attend to the principal parts of the mass, viz. 
 to the offeftory, consecration, and reception ? Or did you not endeavour 
 to break off the distraction, and how often ? Pen. Two or three times 
 in a lukewarm manner, but not efficaciously enough. Conf. Did you 
 hear another mass on that day ? Pen. No : because it was the last 
 mass. Conf. Are you therefore in the habit of being negligent in 
 prayer and in divine service, and in attending preaching ? Pen. No: 
 but this happened only once ; otherwise, I always frequent preaching 
 in my parish, and I endeavour to fulfil the obligations of my station. 
 Conf. Does nothing else oppress your conscience? Pen. Nothing". 
 Conf. You ought to avoid those places and causes of distractions in 
 the temple. Pen. I will do so. Conf. Therefore you are sorry that 
 you have offended God whom you love above all things, and you are 
 resolved not to sin in future? Pen. I am sorry. Conf. You must 
 elicit an act of contrition. Afterwards at the time when the penitent 
 renews the contrition, the confessor says : may Almighty God have 
 mercy, «&c. Do you accuse yourself of all those things inasmuch as 
 you are guilty before God? Pen. Yes. Conf. For sacramental 
 penance at a proper time, you will hear mass, and give to the poor 
 one farthing. These things being done, he absolves the penitent 
 sacramentally." 
 
464 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 X. 
 
 THE EXAMINATION OF LABOURERS. 
 
 Pen. Confessors are in the habit of putting- questions to me. Conf. 
 My friend, have you not examined your conscience ? Pen. Yes : but 
 I recollect better, when I am questioned. Conf. Have you regularly 
 and honestly confessed at other times ? Have you omitted something 
 about which you were perhaps not asked ? Pen. I never knowingly 
 have omitted any thing.* Conf. How long is it since you have con- 
 fessed? Pen. Three months. Conf. Of what state, condition, or 
 trade are you ? Pen. I am a stone cutter and unmarried. Conf. 
 When you work for daily wages, do you perform the proper labour ? 
 Do you not sometimes spend time idly ? Pen. Sometimes, in talking. 
 Conf. How often, and how long a time have you thus spent ? Pen. 
 Nearly every day, four or five times, so that daily, this time put to- 
 gether may amount to an hour, one day more, another less. Conf. 
 How much wages do you earn every day ? Pen. One florin. Conf. 
 Therefore, every day you have committed injustice to the amount of 
 about two stivers ? Pen. So it is. Conf. Have you laboured thus 
 daily for others for day wages ? Pen. Yes, on every week day now for 
 three years. Conf. Have you been the cause that other labourers 
 have also neglected their time like yourself? Pen. Yes ; and this 
 with respect to two ; for I am in the habit of relating some new or 
 ridiculous things, the others whilst listening desist from work. Conf. 
 Do you know that you have sinned in the way of scandal by giving 
 them occasion of sinning ? Besides that you have sinned against 
 justice, and that you are bound to make restitution or compensation 
 by other works according to the proportion of the time neglected ? 
 Moreover you ought to admonish your other associates : if, however, 
 they neglect to make restitution, you are bound to do it. Pen. It is 
 true ; I have sometimes been reproved by the master for it. Conf. 
 Did this same thing happen before the last confession ? Pen. Yes. 
 Conf. Did you confess it ? Pen. No, because the confessors did not 
 ask me about it. Conf. For how long a time have you remained in 
 this state ? Pen. Now for three years. Conf. Friend, through all 
 this time, you have been in continual sin, and your confessions have 
 been invalid ; for which reason you ought to institute a general con- 
 fession of this time. How often in this time have you made confes- 
 sion, and communed ? Pen. Three times in the year. Conf. So 
 often you have received the sacraments unworthily ; therefore, examine 
 your conscience more rigidly concerning other sins with which you 
 
 i 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 465 
 
 are probably burdened, and accuse yourself of them all, as well as 
 of the omission of acts of the supernatural precepts of charity, contri- 
 tion, and of annual confession and communion. You will return eight 
 days hence, meanwhile amend your ways, and pray to God daily. 
 You will also admonish the others about making restitution." 
 
 XL 
 
 EXAMINATION OP A GENTEEL MAN. 
 " CoNF. i^re you in the habit of attending preaching, and of some- 
 times reading spiritual books ? Pen. No. Conf. Do you remember 
 the mystery, which we call to mind at this time of Easter ? Pen. I 
 do not remember. Conf. What mystery is fulfilled in Christ on the 
 first day of Easter, after his passion ? Pen. That I do not know. 
 Conf. What do you believe concerning Christ : how was he born, how 
 did he die, and where is he now ? Pen. He was born of Mary, and 
 was crucified. Conf. How many natures has Christ ? Pen. I do not 
 know. Conf. Is Christ God and man at the same time ? Pen. Yes, 
 so it is. Conf. How many divine Persons are there ? Pen. Only 
 one, because there is only one God. Conf. Do you not therefore be- 
 lieve the mystery of the Most Holy Trinity ? In what does it consist ? 
 Pen. Children know these things ; I have forgotten them. Conf. My 
 dear sir, children learn these things because they are indispensable to 
 salvation, through the necessity of means ; and unless you explicitly 
 believe these things, you cannot be saved, although you might . be in- 
 vincibly ignorant of them ; but you, an intelligent man, are culpably 
 ignorant of these things ! From what time have you begun to live 
 thus negligently ? Pen. From my twentieth year ; for ten years until 
 the present time. Conf. It is necessary that you institute a general 
 confession from the twentieth year of your age : for during this whole 
 time you have been in a state of mortal sin, and the confessions you 
 have instituted are invalid ; neither have you fulfilled the precepts of 
 annual confession and communion ; but before you can be absolved, it 
 first behooves you to learn the rudiments of the faith, which must be 
 believed through the necessity of means. For which purpose, you 
 must buy a Mechlin catechism, and in it you will daily read four les- 
 sons, and you will return after eight days." 
 
 Examination of one of the common people. 
 " Conf. Are you in the habit of attending preaching, and of some- 
 times reading spiritual books? Pen. No. Conf. Why not? Pen. 
 Because I am a servant ; time is not given me for attending preach- 
 39* 
 
466 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 ing, and I do not know how to read. Conf. How many Gods are 
 there ? Pen. There is one God. Conp. How many divine Persons 
 are there ? Pen. Three, viz., God the Father, God the Son, God the 
 Holy Ghost. Conf. Which person of them became incarnate, and 
 suifcred for us the death of the cross? Pen. The Second Person, who 
 is called Jesus Christ. Conf. What reward will the good receive after 
 this life, and what the bad ? Pen. God will give the eternal life of 
 the kingdom of heaven to the good ; but the wicked will be sent into 
 hell. Conf. Why do you believe all these things ? Pen. That I may 
 be saved. Conf. I do not ask the final, but the formal reason of your 
 faith ; namely, why do you believe these things to be true ? Pen. Be- 
 cause our pastor has taught me so. Conf. Whence does your pastor 
 know that these things are true ? Pen. From his books, for he has 
 a great many. Conf. But whence have those books, or the writers, 
 learned these mysteries ? Have they fabricated them ? Pen. They 
 have had them from ancient time, from the Church. Conf. Who 
 manifested and revealed them to the Church? Pen. God. Conf. 
 Why do you believe God, who reveals ? Pen. Because he is the 
 highest and eternal truth. Conf. How many and what are the sacra- 
 ments in the Catholic Church ? Pen. They are baptism, the Eucha- 
 rist, and confession ; the rest I do not know. Conf. Do you know, 
 and do you sometimes recite Pater noster, Ave Maria, Credo, &c. ? 
 Pen. I recite daily, just as I have learned. Conf. Leave that family, 
 unless they concede to you time for learning those things which it be- 
 comes a Christian man to know. Besides, do you resolve to learn the 
 other things which ought to be known as soon as possible, and will 
 you bestow greater care on the salvation of your soul, Eh ? Pen. I 
 will do so. Conf. Proceed in the confession of your sins, that you 
 may bo absolved." 
 
 NOTES UPON SCHEMA XI. 
 
 " Therefore those who are ignorant of the mysteries, which ought to 
 be believed by necessity of means, cannot be absolved so long as they 
 labour under this ignorance : whether this is vincible, or invincible ; 
 and all confessions made in such ignorance, are invalid, and ought to 
 be repeated, because without faith it is impossible to please God. 
 Heb. xi. 
 
 " Blameless ignorance of other articles of the faith does not render 
 them invalid ; but if it has been mortally bad, they have been invalid 
 and sacrilegious at the same time, on account of the defect of contri- 
 tion, which cannot consist together with negligence that is mortally 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 467 
 
 bad, or with actual mortal sin. But lest an occasion for pretended in- 
 dignation should be afforded to some, especially the more genteel, if 
 the examination should be begun from common things, the following 
 course may be taken with them. 
 
 " CoNF. Through whoso merits do you hope for the remission of 
 sins? If the penitent replies aptly, v. g., if he says : through the 
 merits of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, offered on the altar of the cross, 
 that he might satisfy for us sinners ; you know the lion by his claw, 
 and that he is sufficiently instructed ; but if he cannot reply, you will 
 descend to less things, as above. However an examination would be 
 made foolishly in this manner : Do you believe that there is one God? 
 Threefold in Persons ? Do you believe that the Second Person be- 
 came incarnate for us ? &c. ; because the very thing which must be 
 answered is manifest, and thus the question is rendered useless." 
 
 COROLLARY. 
 
 Of interrogatories. 
 From the Roman ritual, and the Mechlin pastorale, the following 
 ought ordinarily to be made. 1. How long it is since the penitent has 
 confessed. 2. Of what condition he is, in order that he may be inter- 
 rogated concerning the sins which are usually committed in that con- 
 dition. 3. Whether he has fulfilled the imposed penance. 4. Whether 
 he has regularly and honestly confessed at other times. 5. Whether 
 he has first diligently examined his conscience as he ought. 6. 
 Whether he has learned the rudiments of the faith, and other things 
 necessary to be known, 7. If the penitent has not mentioned the 
 number, and kinds, and circumstances of the sins necessary to be ex- 
 plained, let the priest prudently interrogate him." 
 
 Of denying absolution. 
 " In the same place also they are mentioned to whom absolution is 
 to -be denied on account of the defect of the proper disposition, namely • 
 1. Who give no signs of sorrow, or not sufficient. 2. Who will not 
 lay aside their animosities and enmities. 3. Who will not restore an- 
 other's property, if they are able. 4. Who will not leave the proximate 
 occasion of sinning. 5. Who will not relinquish sins in any other 
 way, and amend their life for the better. 6. Who have given public 
 scandal, unless they publicly make satisfaction, and remove the scandal. 
 To these the Lovanians add such as are ignorant of the articles of the 
 faith ; but this cause the rituals mention afterwards. Yet it is to be 
 observed that in a sin, the following things may concur, and ought to 
 
4G8 CONCERNING FENANCE. 
 
 be exposed : 1. Of what kind the external, and of what kind the in- 
 ternal act is ; and of what kind that was which was voluntary. 2. The 
 kind of sin with the expression of the particular object or individual. 
 
 3. The number of acts and objects : the habit and proximate occasion 
 of sinning. Then the circumstances : 1. Who^ the quality or condi- 
 tion of the person acting. 2. What, the quality of the object, the 
 quantity of the action, and the accidental effects of loss, scandal, dan- 
 ger, &c. 3. Where, the quality of the place, namely, sacred or public. 
 
 4. With what aids, the instruments, means, companions. 5. Why, 
 the aim and intention of the acting person. 6. How, ignorance, pas- 
 sion, earnestness, contempt, command, counsel, consent, &c. 7. 
 When, the quality and quantity of the time, or, the extraordinary dura- 
 tion of the sin : also the duration of the desire towards the sin, tefore 
 and after it" 
 
 The minister of the sacrament of penance, is the 
 priest only, wiio has jurisdiction over the penitent; the 
 choice of a confessor is a highly important matter ; it is not 
 lawful to confess to a deacon or layman. The power of 
 giving absolution, belongs to the priest by virtue of his ordi- 
 nation, through these words: Receive the Holy Ghost, whose 
 sins ye shall forgive, &c. There is no reservation in the 
 article of death, and thus all priests may absolve any peni- 
 tents whatsoever, from any sins and censures ; and in such 
 a case, every priest is bound to absolve from an obligation 
 of charity. Even an excommunicated priest has this autho- 
 rity, according to the common opinion of the Church. 
 
 The article of death is understood, as signifying not only 
 the time of the death agony, but " such a danger of death, 
 that unless he confesses to this priest not approved, some 
 danger may threaten, that perhaps he may never have an 
 opportunity of confessing, or at least of confessing entirely 
 to one who is approved ; v. g., if it may be apprehended 
 that the sick man will perhaps lose his sense or speech, 
 before an approved priest who has been sent for, can arrive." 
 The qualities requisite in the confessor, are these three: 
 goodness, knowledge, and prudence. He ought to have 
 such a knowledge of theology, as to be acquainted with the 
 common principles, and he should be able to resolve com- 
 mon cases ; but if he does not possess proper knowledge, 
 his absolution is still valid ; unless it should become invalid, 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 469 
 
 through the wrong disposition of the penitent, who knowing 
 the confessor's want of skill, chooses him in order to escape 
 the proper judgment for his sins. In order to be able to 
 apply speciar remedies, the confessor must always ascertain 
 the root of the disease. (Nos. 99-113.) 
 
 OF THE SEAL OF CONFESSION. (No. 159.) 
 
 The seal of sacramental confession, is the obligation of 
 concealincr those thintrs which are learned from sacramental 
 confession. This contains the mystic signification that God 
 forgives sins and blots them out, as if he did not remember 
 them. The sacramental seal is obligatory from positive 
 divine commmand; from natural right, which enjoins, that 
 secrets be preserved ; and from ecclesiastical law, which is 
 to this effect : " But let the priest beware, that he do not by 
 any means, betray the' sinner, by word or sign, or by any 
 other mode ; but if he is in want of prudent counsel, let him 
 cautiously inquire, without any mention of the person; since 
 we decree, that he who shall presume to reveal a sin detected 
 by him in penitential judgment, shall not only be deposed 
 from the priestly office, but shall also be thrust into a closed 
 monastery, to perform perpetual penance." 
 
 THE VIOLATION OF THE SACRAMENTAL SEAL 
 is a sin of sacrilege against the virtue of religion : also a 
 sin of unfaithfulness against a neighbour : because a secret 
 committed to another, is obligatory from fidelity. This 
 treachery is a mortal sin, no matter how small the affair 
 itself may be. No circumstances can justify the disclosure 
 of any thing learned at the confessional ; " ALTHOUGH 
 THE LIFE OR SALVATION OF A MAN, OR THE 
 RUIN OF THE STATE SHOULD DEPEND UPON 
 IT; NOR CAN THE POPE GIVE ANY DISPENSA- 
 TION IN THIS CASE; SO THAT THIS SECRET 
 OF THE SEAL, IS TPIEREFORE MORE BINDING, 
 THAN THE OBLIGATION OF AN- OATH, VOW, 
 NATURAL SECRET, &c. ; and this from the positive 
 will of God. 
 
 " What, therefore, must a confessor reply, who is asked 
 concerning the truth, ivhich he has learned through sacra- 
 mental confession alone ? 
 
 " HE MUST REPLY THAT HE DOES NOT KNOW 
 
470 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 IT, AND IF IT IS NECESSARY, HE MUST CON- 
 FIRM THE SAME WITH AN OATH. 
 
 " Obj. In no case is it lawful to lie : but this confessor 
 would lie, because he knows the truth ; therefore, &c. 
 
 "Ans. I deny the minor; because such a confessor is 
 interrogated as a man, and answers as a man : BUT NOW 
 HE DOES NOT KNOW THIS TRUTH AS A MAN, 
 ALTHOUGH HE MAY KNOW IT AS GOD, says St. 
 Thorn., &c. ; and this sense is naturally in the answer : for 
 when he is questioned or replies out of confession, he is con- 
 sidered as a man, 
 
 " What if it be directly asked from the confessor, whe- 
 ther he knows this through sacramental confession ? 
 
 " Ans. In this case he need answer nothing ; so Steyaert 
 with Sylvius ; but the question is to be rejected as impious : 
 or also, he might say absolutely, not relatively to the ques- 
 ton: I know nothing: because the word /, restricts to human 
 knowledge. 
 
 " LIKEWISE, IF A CONFESSOR BE CITED IN A 
 JUDICIAL CASE, THAT HE MAY GIVE HIS REA- 
 SON FOR REFUSING ABSOLUTION; HE MUST 
 PROTEST THAT IN THIS CASE, HE ACKNOW- 
 LEDGES NO SUPERIOR, EXCEPT GOD. What will 
 the confessor reply, who is asked whether he has absolved 
 such a one 1 He will reply that he has fulfilled his duty. 
 He might sometimes testify that he has absolved him, if from 
 it suspicion would not follow, that any other person, to whom 
 the relation is made, had been dismissed without absolution. 
 
 " Observe that the seal of confession does not hinder the 
 use of human knowledge'received from another source : thus 
 the confessor, if he has seen or heard, that certain faults 
 have been committed by those whose confessions he has 
 received, might speak of those faults, in so far as he has 
 heard or seen them, adding nothing of the knowledge 
 obtained in confession; and for this reason, he will pru- 
 dently add the cause of this human knowledge, by saying, 
 I have heard, I have seen, &c. : if any things are related, 
 which he knows from the mere knowledge of confession to 
 be false, he ought not on this account to argue that they are 
 false." (No. 160.) 
 
 This duty of secresy, obtains, in respect to every sacra- 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 471 
 
 mental confession ; and it is sufficient, that it is sacramental 
 in the intention of the party confessing. (No. 161.) 
 
 A confessor who relates what he has heard in confession, 
 but in such a way, that the person confessing, cannot be 
 ascertained, and that no prejudice can result from it to the 
 penitent, does not violate the seal. But confessors are admo- 
 nished to abstain from such narrations, except for the sake 
 of asking counsel. " A priest does not violate sacramental 
 secresy, by saying, This man has confessed to me : nor by 
 declaring, I have absolved this man ; unless suspicion might, 
 in that case, arise from it, that some one else had not been 
 absolved. To say, I have not absolved this man, is more 
 odious, because it usually denotes his want of disposition. 
 What kind of a certificate will a confessor write, concern- 
 ing the confession of him whom he does not absolve 7 One 
 of this kind : 
 
 " I, the undersigned, declare that John N has sacra- 
 
 mentally confessed to me, this day of month, 
 
 1794. N. N., confessor in the Metrop. Church, 
 
 S. Rum. Mechl." 
 
 *'It is proper, however, always to write this certificate 
 under the same form, even when absolution has been denied 
 or delayed ; because it is true, that he has sacramentally 
 confessed. It is also safer not to mention that absolution has 
 been giv-en, in order that when it is not added, no suspicion 
 may arise that absolution has been denied." (No. 163.) 
 
 All those to whom the knowledge of any thing said in 
 confession comes, whether mediately or immediately, law- 
 fully or unlawfully, are bound by the sacramental seal to 
 keep it secret. (No. 165.) 
 
 If permission to reveal the secret is obtained from the 
 penitent, v. g., if the penitent says; "those things which I 
 have confessed, I tell you out of the confession ;" then the 
 priest knowing it as a man, may mention it, only let there 
 be no scandal. Without the permission of the penitent, it 
 is not lawful for a priest to speak out of the confession, to 
 the individual, about the sins which he has confessed. He 
 may speak of them to the penitent after he has given abso- 
 lution, and so long as they are in the confessional. (No. 166.) 
 
 Neither is it lawful to make any use of the knowledge 
 acquired from confession, when there is danger that some- 
 
472 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 •I 
 
 thing would be directly or indirectly revealed, concerning 
 the confession. " Thus Clement XVIII. prohibited the use 
 of the knowledge of confession for external government, 
 May 26, A. D. 1594, in these words : As well superiors, as 
 confessors, who have subsequently been promoted to the 
 rank of superior, must most carefully beware, lest they make 
 use of that knowledge of the sins of others, which they have 
 obtained in confession, for external government." Hence 
 an abbot may not depose the prior of a monastery, whom 
 he knows to be unworthy from confession alone. " The 
 knowledge obtained from confession, may be used when the 
 sinner is no way exposed, when no injury results either to 
 himself or another ; and in short, when nothing intervenes 
 which renders the confession odious. Thus it is lawful for 
 a confessor to pray for the penitent, it is proper for him to 
 consult books and more learned men, also to observe certain 
 things, which, under another head, he is bound to observe : 
 V. g., a confessor understanding from confessions, that he 
 speaks in too loud a voice, that he is negligent in his duty, 
 in visiting the sick, &c., might amend those defects. In 
 those things which the penitent considers favourable to him- 
 self, the use of the knowledge of confession, is not thought 
 so much to violate the seal, as on account of that part by 
 which the confession might be rendered odious. Likewise, 
 if through confession, he knows that heresies are scattered 
 in his parish, that certain vices and sins are skulking about, 
 he may by general instructions and admonitions, fortify the 
 faithful against such sins: so as it does not betray the 
 person." (No. 170.) 
 
 A priest if asked to administer sacraments to a sick man, 
 whom he knows to be unworthy, from mere knowledge 
 obtained in confession, must administer the last sacraments 
 of the holy Viaticum, and extreme unction. 
 
 " What must he done by a confessor, who hears the con- 
 fession of a girl, who is pregnant, and near to death, 
 which thing is unknown to all ? He ought to induce her to 
 declare her pregnancy to some one out of the confession; in 
 order that, if she should perhaps die, the foetus may be bap- 
 tized ; if she refuses, she is not to be absolved ; however, the 
 confessor, without leave of the penitent, may not reveal this 
 k) any one, although the foetus should perish without baptism. 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 473 
 
 " What shall the confessor do, who from confession alone 
 has understood that poisoned wine loill he offered him to 
 drink, in the celebration cf the mass ? Such a confession 
 will often be not sacramental, because it is not made with the 
 intention of the sacrament, but with a spirit of unjust menac- 
 ing : and the confessor might immediately reply to such a 
 person confessing, that he does not receive this declaration 
 as a sacramental confession. But if it be supposed sacra- 
 mental, (which it might more readily be, if the evil was 
 threatened by another than the person confessing,) and the 
 person confessing will in no way consent to the use of the 
 knowledge of the confession : Neesen and Pauwels resolve 
 that the confessor may not omit the celebration of the mass, 
 if other causes of omitting do not occur : for this makes very 
 much for the reverence of the sacrament, and at the same 
 time for the increase among all of the security of the seal : 
 so that in this case it would be necessary to trust to Divine 
 Providence. And this must be indubitably maintained, if 
 from the omission of mass the person of the one committing 
 the crime, or the person of the penitent would be revealed, 
 or any difficulty happen to them. 
 
 " Sylvius, Conink, and others teach, that the confessor may 
 lawfully omit the mass, having feigned some other cause- 
 And this resolution seems plausible enough in a case in which 
 no one, not even the penitent, can observe that the confessor 
 omits mass from the knowledge of the confession : because 
 no revelation of the confession is made, nor is any difficulty 
 created for any one, nor any odium on the sacrament : in- 
 deed some suppose, that the confessor in Jthis case would be 
 bound to abstain from the celebration of the mass, in order 
 to hinder evil results." 
 
 So much for the priests' belief in their own doctrine of 
 transubstantiation ! No better evidence could be desired to 
 prove that they know full well that the bread and wine are 
 not changed into the body and blood, soul and divinity of 
 Jesus Christ. Few Papists have any ambition to suffer mar- 
 tyrdom for the sake of transubstantiation ! Let the priest 
 find out that there is any foul play about the wafer, or the 
 wine, and he is not quite such a fool as to put the virtue of 
 40 
 
474 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 his potent charm, " hoc est corpus meum," to a practical 
 test. No, no : he would smile as sweetly as innocence itself, 
 put the poison into the sacred sink, with the proper inten- 
 tion too, and mutter, very complacently, " distingue, dis- 
 
 " According to the aforesaid doctrine the following cases 
 may be resolved : whether a confessor may desist from a 
 journey in which he has learned from confession alone that 
 he is to be killed ; whether a confessor may dismiss a ser- 
 vant, whom he knows to be a thief, from her confession 
 alone." (No. 171.) 
 
 OF SATISFACTION FOR SINS IN GENERAL. (No. 172.) 
 
 " What is satisfaction ? It is the voluntary endurance 
 of punishment, in order to make amends for an injury offered 
 to God. It is called voluntary, through, the acceptance of the 
 will. 
 
 " Obj. By the affliction of diseases we can satisfy, but 
 they are not voluntary ; therefore, &c. 
 
 " -JLns. I deny the inference : because to endure patiently 
 and penitentially, is voluntary : but we then satisfy by their 
 voluntary endurance, not only on account of the internal act, 
 but also through the external or real suffering accepted by 
 us." To the heretical objection that Christ has fully satis- 
 fied for our sins, and that therefore our works of satisfaction 
 are useless, the reply is made, that his satisfaction must be 
 applied by us in such a way as to profit us : and to this pur- 
 pose our satisfactions tend, and are therefore not superfluous. 
 The advantage and practice of satisfactory works is proved 
 by the examples of the Ninevites, of David, and of all the 
 saints of the New Testament. The doctrine that one man 
 may satisfy for another, is founded on the communion of 
 saints ; but it is not possible that one should fulfil sacramental 
 satisfaction for another. "Hence this 15th proposition was 
 condemned by Alex. VII. A penitent may, by his own au- 
 thority, substitute for himself another, who may fulfil his 
 penance in his stead." The penitent may profitably be ad- 
 monished to seek to have works of satisfaction performed for 
 him by others, but these works done by others are not a part 
 of the sacrament J but the act of the penitent, who makes pro- 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 475 
 
 vision Cot the performance of these works for himself, is a' 
 part of the sacrament. Satisfaction is distinguished as sa- 
 cramentalj and not sacramental ; 'perfect and imperfect ; 
 public and private ; satisfaction in punishment, and satis- 
 faction FOR punishment, which is called satisfaction, or 
 sufficient suffering, as takes place in purgatory. (No. 172.) 
 
 Sacramental satisfaction is the voluntary endurance of 
 punishment enjoined by the confessor for the compensation 
 of voluntary injury done to God. This satisfaction is com- 
 monly called Penance. The confessor is under solemn 
 obligation to impose sacramental satisfaction whenever he 
 absolves. Even upon sick persons, and those who are at the 
 point of death, some penance must be imposed, which they 
 must endure or perform immediately, before death, lest over- 
 come by the disease, they should forget it. (No. 173.) 
 
 The penitent is under solemn obligation to accept any 
 reasonable penance imposed on him by the confessor ; if he 
 deems it unreasonable, he may decline it, and absolution 
 a.lso, and go to some other confessor. It is a sin of sacrilege 
 to omit the performance of a penance : the opinion that it is 
 only a venial offence to neglect the penance when the matter 
 is in itself a trifle, is expressly repudiated, unless a small and 
 unimportant part of the penance is omitted, in which case it 
 may sometimes be a venial offence. Satisfaction is imposed 
 as chastisement for past sins ; as medicine for present of- 
 fences, and as a preservative against future transgressions. 
 (No. 175.) 
 
 Sacramental satisfactions ought according to the council 
 of Trent to be salutary and convenient according to the 
 quality of the crimes and the ability of the penitents. All 
 works of satisfaction may be reduced to these three kinds, 
 prayer, fasting and alms-giving. 
 
 " Lest a confessor who is a novice should perhaps hesi- 
 tate, what he may enjoin as satisfaction, we here subjoin the 
 individual works of satisfaction now practised in the church, 
 according to that which P. Tombeur et P. Bossuyt observe. 
 Thus under the class o( prayers the following may be en- 
 joined once, or several times, or for several days, or weeks : 
 
 1. "To say five Pater Noster, and Ave Maria, in 
 memory of Christ's five wounds, either on his bended knees, 
 or with extended arms, or before a crucifix. 
 
470 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 2. " To recite the rosary, or litanies of the blessed Virgin 
 Mary, or of the Saints, &c. 
 
 3. " To read the psalm Miserere (51st.?) or seven peni- 
 tential psalms. 
 
 4. " To hear masses, or lauds, or preaching.^ 
 
 5. " To read a chapter in Thomas a Kempis. 
 
 6. " To visit the churches to pray before the tabernacle. 
 
 7. " At stated times, early, at evening, or through the day, 
 or as often as they hear the sound of the bell, to repeat 
 orally or in the heart, ejaculatory prayers, acts of contri- 
 tion, or of charity : v. g. I love thee, O God, above all things ; 
 I detest all my sins : I will sin no more: Jesus, crucified 
 for me, have mercy upon me. 
 
 8. " On the appointed day to confess again, or at least to 
 return to the confessor." 
 
 To the class oi" fasting is referred every thing which per- 
 tains to the mortification of the body : thus either a perfect 
 fast, or a part of a fast, may be enjoined ; v. g; 
 
 1. " Let him fast on the sixth day of the week, or oftener. 
 
 2. " Let him fast only till twelve o'clock. 
 
 3. " Let him not drink before noon, or after noon, except 
 at dinner, or supper, although he may be thirsty : let him 
 abstain from wine and strong beer. 
 
 4. " Let him eat lefes, at evening let him take only half 
 a meal. 
 
 " The above mentioned abstinences are properly imposed 
 on workmen, because they may be connected with labour, 
 because otherwise they are wont to excuse themselves on 
 account of their work. St. Jerome confirms the same, when 
 he says : scanty food, and a stomach ever hungry, is better 
 than a three days' fast. 
 
 5. " Let him rise out of bed earlier : let him kneel more 
 frequently and for a longer time: let him endure cold: at 'a 
 certain time let him observe silence : let him abstain from 
 games and from recreations, &c. 
 
 *' To the class of alms is reduced whatever is expended 
 for the advantage of a neighbour : v. g. 
 
 1. *' To make presents of money, clothes, food, &c. 
 
 * Let no one suppose that this is a small penance. I once, and but 
 once, heard a priest preach, and from such endurance of rhodomontade 
 und fustian may 1 ever be delivered ! 
 
CONCERNING PENANCE. 477 
 
 2. " To afford personal helps, to wait upon the sick, to 
 pray for the conversion of sinners, &c., and works of any 
 other nnercy, whether corporeal or spiritual." (No. 176.) 
 
 Of the amount of Satisfaction to be imposed. 
 (No. 179.) 
 
 The confessor must impose so much penance as is pro- 
 portionate to the sins and to the persons : in order that by it 
 the purposes and effects above prescribed may be attained ; 
 council of Trent, sess. xiv. c 8. Lest by enjoining certain 
 very light works for very serious offences, they may be- 
 come partakers of the sins of others. In a doubtful case 
 it is more safe to impose a less penance than is due, than to 
 impose a greater : because such defect will be supplied in 
 purgatory. (Comfortable, very !) 
 
 " What penance is it therefore proper to impose for 
 mortal sin, v. g. for voluntary drunkenness without scan- 
 dal ? Ans. That he read on two days with bended knees 
 the psalm Miserere : [Have mercy upon me, d^c :) that he 
 fast twice in this week : and that he distribute to the poor, 
 twice as much as he consumed in drink. 
 
 " What if he is a poor man, and a labourer in heavy 
 work ? Ans. For three days in succession let him repeat 
 five Pater et Ave, (our Father and Hail Mary,) on his 
 bended knees: for two days let him not drink before noon, 
 and at evening lef him eat only half a meal ; on the two 
 following Lord's days let him not enter a tavern : but in the 
 afternoon let him walk to preaching and lauds. Generally 
 with Steyaert sect. v. &c., it is proper to appoint, that for 
 some mortal sins, neither very grievous, nor many, a pen- 
 ance may be imposed continuing through several days, 
 through one or two weeks, or until the next confession. It 
 is generally expedient that a previous penance should be 
 finished with the following confession, lest the penances of 
 the penitent should accumulate, and lest, overwhelmed by 
 their multitude, he should forget them, or, becoming weary, 
 negligently omit them. For many and serious sins especi- 
 ally when a general confession of a vicious life is instituted, 
 a penance may be imposed continuing through months, half 
 a year, or a whole year, or longer; and in this case ij; is 
 proper that the penance be discontinued, so that if it be hin- 
 40* 
 
478 CONCERNING PENANCE. 
 
 (lerod by one work it may be supplied by another : v. g. if 
 on some day, he should be hindered from hearing daily 
 mass, let him supply it by alms or some other work," &c. 
 
 It is therefore not expedient to impose a penance of seven 
 years for adultery, according to the ancient penitential can- 
 ons. S. Carol. Borr. admonishes confessors that they enjoin 
 heavy and difficult penances upon blasphemers. (No. 179.) 
 
 The following causes will justify the occasional applica- 
 tion of smaller penances. Inability, arising from sickness, 
 weakness, labour, &c. Indulgences earned by the penitent ; 
 spii'itual infirmity ; and the pusillanimity of the penitent, 
 lest he be too much dejected. It is not lawful to impose a 
 greater penance than is justly due, if the relation be made 
 with respect to all the three purposes of penance ; (viz. as 
 chastisement, medicine, and as a preservative ;) but it is 
 lawful if done with reference to only one object. Thus, v. 
 g. rigid restitution is imposed upon boys at first for slight 
 theft, and a severe and longer penance as a preservative and 
 restraint against relapse ; although the purpose of expiating 
 the temporal punishment would not require so great a one 
 for a venial sin. From this it appears, how sometimes a 
 severe penance may be imposed for venial sin, and a greater 
 than for mortal sin. (No. 180.) 
 
 The most convenient time of enjoining penance is before 
 absolution. (No. 181.) 
 
 The obligation of sacramental satisfaction ceases, when 
 the sacrament is not valid ; when the penance enjoined is 
 impossible ; when the penitent entirely forgets it ; in the 
 latter case Suarez, Neesen and others, liberate him entirely 
 on account of inability ; but others maintain that he is bound 
 to perform some other penance. (No. 183.) 
 
 The confessor may change the sacramental satisfaction 
 for something else. (No. 184.) 
 
 Of Canonical Penance. (No. 186.) 
 
 " Which penance is called canonical ? Ans. That which 
 was performed according to the canons, or laws, or statutes of 
 councils, bishops, or churches ; v. g., wearing a sack sprin- 
 kled with ashes, standing before the church doors, fasting on 
 bread and water, &c. The penitential canons took their 
 origin in the third century, on occasion of the heresy of the 
 
CONCERNING INDULGENCES. 470 
 
 Montanists and Novatians, who denied penance: at which 
 time also, the four grades of penitents were instituted ; the 
 weeping, the hearing, the prostrate, and the standing. The 
 observance and practice of these penances, sensibly decHned 
 from the ninth century, in consequence of admitting their 
 redemption by ahns, flagellations, psalteries, &c. Subse- 
 quently, still more on the occasion of the Jerusalem expedi- 
 tion, for the recovery of the Holy Land. Afterwards, in 
 the twelfth century, and finally in the thirteenth, the obliga- 
 tion ceased through the use of indulgences ; which were 
 granted for the sake of munificent alms, or some other work, 
 from which, at that time, magnificent temples were con- 
 structed and built." 
 
 These canonical penances were imposed only on account 
 of the more enormous sins ; though, sometimes people 
 assumed them without obligation, from a voluntary humility. 
 These public penances pertained to the external discipline of 
 the Church, and were not sacramental, as they might be 
 remitted by a deacon. 
 
 CHAPTER XL. 
 Treatise concerning Indulgences. 
 
 " What is an indulgence ? Ans. It is the remission of 
 temporal punishment due to sins remitted as to their guilt, 
 made by the power of the keys, apart from the sacrament, 
 by the application of satisfactions which are contained in the 
 treasury of the Church. What is meant by the treasury of 
 the Church ? It is an accumulation of spiritual blessings 
 remaining in divine acceptance, and whose disposition is 
 entrusted to the Church. 
 
 ^^ From what does this treasury coalesce? It coalesces 
 primarily from the superabundant satisfaction of Christ, then 
 from the supereffluent satisfactions of the blessed Virgin 
 Mary, and the other saints. This treasury is the foundation, 
 or the matter of indulgences, and these resources are infi- 
 nite, by reason of the satisfactions of Christ, and therefore 
 
480 CONCERNING INDULGENCES. 
 
 never will be exhausted; besides the superabundant satisfac- 
 tions of pious men are daily added." 
 
 The objection that all the good works of the saints are 
 abundantly remunerated by God in heaven, and that there- 
 fore there can be no superabundant satisfactions from them, 
 is thus answered: "All the good works of the saints are 
 rewarded, in so far as they are meritorious, but not inasmuch 
 as they are satisfactory; for many saints had not so great 
 a debt of temporal punishments, as the price of their satis- 
 factions : for, V. g., the blessed Virgin Mary never contracted 
 any debt of punishment, and yet she underwent the most 
 grievous anguish : John the Baptist sanctified in the womb, 
 led an austere life, which he crowned with martyrdom : thus 
 the apostles, martyrs, anchorites, and other innumerable 
 saints and saintesses, suffered more than their sins required, 
 according to the manner which God observes, in exacting 
 punishments. But the satisfactions of the saints concur, 
 not only by way of impetration, as some pretend, but also 
 by way of payment ; as appears from the proposition con- 
 demned in the case of Bajus, No. 60. By the sufferings of 
 the saints communicated in indulgences, our faults are not 
 properly redeemed, but through the communion of love, 
 their sufferings are shared by us, that we may be worthy, 
 who are delivered by the price of Christ's blood, from the 
 punishments due for sins. It is plain from these remarks, 
 that the effect of indulgences is the remission of the tem- 
 poral punishment, remaining after the remission of sin as to 
 its guilt; but the guilt itself of the sin, is not directly remit- 
 ted through indulgences. 
 
 " Obj. Popes sometimes say in bulls, that they grant in- 
 dulgences of sins : therefore, &c. Aims. The cause is put 
 for the effect, and an indulgence of the punishment from the 
 sin is signified ; in which sense it is said, 2 Mace. xii. 46. 
 * It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought, to pray for the 
 dead, that they may be loosed from sins.' Also, when an 
 indulgence from the guilt and penalty is said to be granted, 
 the power of absolving from any fault whatever, in the 
 sacrament of penance, and of relaxing temporal punish- 
 ments is meant ; as Lezana teaches, together with others. 
 But indulgences avail not only in the court of the Church, 
 but also in the court of God ; that is, they not only liberate 
 
COr^CERNING INDULGENCES. 481 
 
 from punishments, inasmuch as they would otherwise be 
 enjoined by the Church ; but also, inasmuch as they are 
 due to God, and would otherwise have to be expiated, either 
 here or in purgatory, as will be shown more at length here- 
 aAer." (No. 236.) 
 
 The division of indulgences is as follows: (No. 237.) 
 
 " 1. Into local, real, and personal. 2. Into plenary, and 
 not plenary : some also are more full ; others ^te most full. 
 3. Into perpetual and temporal. 
 
 *' Perpetual are those which are granted for ever, without 
 limitation of time. Temporal, are those which are conceded 
 only for a limited period, say for seven years, which having 
 elapsed, they cease. Local indulgences are such as are 
 appointed for some place, say a temple, altar, &c. Real, 
 are those which are annexed to any material thing, v. g., a 
 rosary, a coin, an image, &c. : very often, however, such 
 are carried about, which do not in truth subsist." (Beware 
 of counterfeits !) 
 
 " Personal, are those which are directly granted to a per- 
 son, without limitation to a thing or place. 
 
 " What indulgences are plenary 7 Those which are 
 granted for the remission of all the temporal punishment 
 which the person owes : those are called more full, which in 
 addition to this, give the power of absolving from cases and 
 censures reserved to the pontiff: and those are called the 
 most full, to which is added, besides the aforesaid things, 
 according to Collet, the power of commuting vows, or of 
 dispensing in certain irregularities. Observe, that although 
 plenary indulgences are sometimes given under this expres- 
 sion : Indulgences in the form of a jubilee, they never have 
 privilege to the extent of absolution, from reserved cases, 
 &c., unless it is formally and expressly contained in the 
 bull. For these words are not added, in order that the more 
 ample effect of the indulgence may be expressed, but that 
 the greater desire and abundance of the cause may be im- 
 plied, and that anxiety may be excited in the faithful, of 
 earning the indulgence." So Suarez and others. 
 
 " What indulgences are called not plenary ? Those 
 which are not conceded for the remission of the entire tem- 
 poral punishment, but are usually limited through certain 
 days or years, according to the mode in which the canonical 
 
482 CONCERNING INDULGENCES. 
 
 penances were formerly prescribed; after these were aU» - 
 gated, the use of indulgences began to be more common, 
 and as it were, succeeded in their place : and thus the mode 
 was introduced of measuring, or determining indulgences, 
 not according to months or weeks, but by days and years, 
 as the canonical penances prescribed. 
 
 " Whati therefore, is signified by an indulgence, v. g., 
 of a hundred days 1 Ans. It is not meant, that by this 
 indulgence a person is liberated from a punishment in pur- 
 gatory, that will last precisely one hundred days, as the 
 common people suppose ; but that he, who obtains this in- 
 dulgence of a hundred days, may obtain so great a remis- 
 sion of temporal punishments in this life, or of those which 
 are to be expiated in purgatory, as he would have obtained, 
 if he had really performed a penance of a hundred days, 
 such as was wont to be imposed, according to the canons, 
 regarding it indeed, merely inasmuch as it is satisfactory : 
 but the remission of how much temporal punishment, or of 
 how many days to be expiated in purgatory, may correspond 
 to this penance or indulgence of one hundred days, is not 
 altogether known ; perhaps not even ten days. 
 
 " Hence also, is understood what is meant by an in- 
 dulgence of one or more quadragence, which is sometimes 
 granted ; a quadragena, according to the canons, was a fast 
 to be continued through forty days ; but when it was per- 
 formed on bread and water, it was called carena, from 
 wanting other food. (Carendo alifs cibis.)" 
 
 " But what is to be said of indulgences of a thousand 
 or even more years, which are recorded as having sometimes 
 been granted 7 I answer with Steyaert : the same as of 
 plenary indulgences, which are still more copious ; for some 
 one might have been a debtor of so many years of penance, 
 if he had sinned to such an extent, that so great a penance 
 was due to him. Neither ought it to appear wonderful, that 
 so many years of punishment were due to the sins of any 
 one, according to the canons, although he could not live so 
 long : because this length of time, says Boudart, might be 
 diminished by the earnestness and fervour of charity, by 
 which the works enjoined, and other works of virtues might 
 be produced : hence, some persons have unjustly inveighed 
 against these indulgences of many years, as though framed 
 
CONCERNING INDULGENCES. 483 
 
 by those who disposed of them, and never granted by the 
 Churcli ; on which account, Steyaert admonishes, that this 
 is one of the passages to be cautiously read in Estius. 
 Meanwhile, Benedict XIV. may be consulted," &c. 
 
 That the Church has the power of granting indulgences, 
 is proved by a decree of the council of Trent ; by Matt. xvi. 
 19. I give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, 
 &c. ; and John xxi. 17. Feed my sheep; also by 2 Cor. ii. 
 10, where Paul remits a part of the temporal punishment, 
 which the incestuous Corinthian owed I ! (No. 238.) 
 
 The Pope is the supreme dispenser of indulgences ; and 
 he has plenitude of power with respect of the whole Church. 
 The bishop may grant indulgences in his diocese, and the 
 archbishop through a whole province, of one year, at the 
 dedication of a church, and of forty days, at the anniversary 
 of the dedication, &c. The bishops have this authority only 
 from ecclesiastical right, the Pope by divine right. (No. 239.) 
 
 The person enjoying an indulgence, must be baptized and 
 in a state of grace. (No. 240.) 
 
 If conceded without just cause, it is invalid. " It is to be 
 observed with Bellarmine, that a just cause for the most part, 
 embraces two things, viz. ; some object acceptable to God, 
 and some work enjoined, in order to obtain that object ; so 
 that the attainment of the object may be more acceptable to 
 God, than the satisfaction itself, which is relaxed through 
 the indulgence. Thus an indulgence is frequently conceded 
 to men, who have deserved well of the Church, without 
 actual works." (No. 243.) 
 
 In No. 244, it is gravely asked "whether indulgences are 
 worth as much as they sound?" And what is stranger still, 
 the question is answered affirmatively, " because otherwise, 
 the concession of indulgences would contain a fraud, and the 
 Church or ecclesiastical superior, proclaiming or pronouncing 
 the indulgences, might be accused of lying or falsehood, 
 
 WHICH IS ABSUED." 
 
 Whoever heard of a lie or a falsehood, or any thing of 
 the kind, being for a moment tolerated in the Church of 
 Rome 1 Such a supposition would verily be absurd / 
 
484 CONCERNING INDULGENCES. 
 
 There is this difference between an indulgence for the living 
 and one foe the dead ; an indulgence for the living, is not 
 only a payment, but an absolution : whereas, an indulgence 
 for the dead, is merely a payment. That indulgences may 
 be applied to souls in purgatory and profit them, is quite 
 certain. 
 
 " 1. Because private believers may apply their own satis- 
 factions to souls in purgatory; therefore the Pope may apply 
 to them the satisfactions of Christ and the saints, from the 
 treasury of the Church. 2. The Pope may apply in- 
 dulgences to the living ; therefore, also to the dead, as they 
 are members of the same body^" To the somewhat formi- 
 dable objection, that " the power of conferring indulgences, 
 is founded on the words of Christ, Whatsoever ye shall bind 
 upon earth, shall be bound in heaven ; but the souls in pur- 
 gatory are not upon earth, therefore, &;c :" the answer is 
 given; " 1. These words upon earth, according to many, 
 are not referred to the object of the loosing, or to those who 
 are loosedj but to the Superior loosing, who only can loose, 
 so long as he is upon earth. 2. The Church only does con- 
 cerning the dead, what the faithful do, who offer prayers and 
 satisfactions to God, that souls may be freed from punish- 
 ments; thus also, the Church offers the satisfactions of 
 Christ and the saints, in payment of punishments due by 
 them." Indulgences may be applied to the dead, " then 
 only when it is expressly signified, that the indulgences are 
 «o made, that they may be applied to the dead : the reason 
 is, that indulgences are valid, only for those for whom they 
 are granted : but when they are conceded for the dead, par- 
 ticular mention is usually made : therefore, if this mention 
 is not made, they cannot be applied to .them. For the same 
 reason, no one can apply indulgences to another living per- 
 son, unless this is expressly granted ; which is not wont to 
 be done." (No. 245.) 
 
 Whether indulgenceiJ for the dead infallibly have their 
 effect or not is a mooted point ; but the Romish doctors 
 generally opine that they have the same value for the dead 
 as for the living, in which conclusion every Protestant will 
 heartily concur. 
 
CONCERNING INDULGENCES. 485 
 
 " An altar is said to be privileged, to which a plenary- 
 indulgence is annexed for that soul for which mass is said 
 at that altar." Whether the soul is by this very act liber- 
 ated from purgatory, whilst mass is said for it at the privileged 
 altar is uncertain ; besides it is also not known whether the 
 cause of the concession is fully sufficient, whether the cele- 
 brant offers with sofficient fervour in order to obtain what he 
 asks, and finally whether God here and now accepts the 
 satisfactions offered to him in payment of the remaining 
 debt. (No. 248.) 
 
 By the Jubilee " is properly signified that plenary indul- 
 gence, which is granted with a certain solemnity by the 
 Roman Pontiff with various favours and particular privileges 
 to those who have performed the prescribed good works. A 
 two-fold Jubilee is usually distinguished : one ordinary, which 
 is granted only every twenty-fifth year to persons visiting 
 the designated churches at Rome, and performing the other 
 things requisite ; and it is called the Jubilee of the holy year : 
 the other extraordinary, which the Pontiffs concede for 
 important reasons occurring out of the 25th year ; such 
 as every Pope is wont to concede at the beginning of his 
 pontificate for a happy reign." 
 
 " The Jubilee of the holy year at Rome lasts through the 
 whole year, beginning from the first Vespers of the Lord's 
 nativity with the ceremony of the opening of the Sacred 
 Gate ; which in the vigil of the nativity of the following 
 year is shut up with a new wall, and remains thus closed 
 until a holy year again recurs." (No. 249.) 
 
 In order to know what privileges are granted, the bull of 
 concession must always be consulted : because they are not 
 always the same, but sometimes more, sometimes fewer. 
 (No. 250.) 
 
 There is scarcely any peculiarity of the Romish church which 
 awakens more painful feelings than the general topic which has been 
 discussed in the last two chapters. It is degrading to human nature 
 to find men of general intelligence who can nevertheless so far forget 
 themselves as to bow down to a fellow-mortal, and breathe into his ear 
 the confession, which should be made to God alone. The priest claims 
 the prerogative of God ; literally sits in the temple as God, and thus 
 perfectly fulfils the sure word of prophecy, which designates this as a 
 striking feature of the Romish apostasy. As man he knows nothing 
 41 
 
486 CONCERNING INDULGENCES. 
 
 that is stated to him by the penitent : so long as the husband or wife, 
 or child is at his feet in the confessional, he sits upon the throne of 
 God as a spiritual judge ! This is literally the arrogant claim of every 
 Romish priest who professes to absolve his fellow-creatures from their 
 sins ! Is it not inconceivable that any mortal should dare to usurp 
 this prerogative ? arid, above all that men should be found willing to 
 recognize the claim and actually to prostrate themselves at his feet 
 that they may obtain the Holy Father's blessing and absolution ? 
 
 There are passages in Peter Dens' Treatise on Penance, &c., which 
 I have been obliged from a regard to decency to pass by. I would 
 not outrage the feelings of my reader by stripping them of their Latin 
 disguise, and their deformity is such that even this covering would be 
 insufficient to hide it from an English reader. Paul tells us that 
 it is a shame to speak of certain things that were done among the 
 Gentiles, but it is actually a shame even to think of some of the topics 
 which are discussed with the most obscene discrimination by Roman 
 theologians, and with which their minds must be familiar before ever 
 they can hear confessions. Every form of imaginable and unimagi- 
 nable bestiality is investigated with the closest scrutiny, and questions 
 are propoimded, which to use the language of a living member of the 
 Romish church, " are enough to make the hair of one's head stand up." 
 There is nothing connected with the matrimonial state, nothing too 
 sacred or secret in the virtuous intercourse of those whom God has 
 joined, which is not made a subject of impudent inquiry. No matter 
 whether the penitent be male or female, the priest may propound what 
 interrogatories he chooses. We cannot say we pity the man, who will 
 suffer his wife and daughters to be thus tortured and trodden down 
 by a Popish priest; if it ever can be lawful to turn with loathing from 
 a fellow-creature, we might be pardoned for an expression of disgust 
 at the sight of such an object ; but when we remember the force of 
 education, the deadly influence of Popish superstition which is the 
 rankest form that fanaticism has ever assumed ; the power of the 
 strong delusions that can bind the soul of man with a chain of ada- 
 mant, and fetter every noble principle, we bless God that we were not 
 educated in the nurture and admonition of the church of Rome, and 
 we pray for our deluded brethren, Father forgive them, they know not 
 what they do ! 
 
 Satan could not possibly have devised a scheme, which more com- 
 pletely subverts the principles and the design of the gospel than this 
 fatal system. The poor Papist is taught to regard his prayers, (such 
 as they are,) the reading of the Scriptures, &c, as punishments ; when 
 
CONCERNING INDULGENCES. 487 
 
 he wishes to make satisfaction for his sins, he goes over the rosary or 
 the litany of the Blessed Virgin. If he has been drunk six times, in 
 as many days, he gets absolution, and is ready to run up a new score 
 with the landlord and his Maker, so soon as with due preparation, he 
 has read the seven penitential psalms on his bended knees, with arms 
 extended before a crucifix ! What if the priest does charge him to 
 keep away from the tavern ? If he can obtain forgiveness at so cheap 
 a rate, he will get drunk again, and do penance for it with a hearty 
 good will. 
 
 Who does not see that the practical result of this spiritual, or rather 
 carnal discipline, will be to fill him with the most determined and in- 
 veterate hatred for prayer, and for the Bible ? He will love them just 
 as soon, and as much as the schoolboy loves the rod ! We may be 
 told that in many instances the operation of the confessional is bene- 
 ficial ; that stolen property is frequently restored to its rightful owner, 
 and that the mere fact that the Papist acknowledges his obligation to 
 confess his sins against God and his neighbour, will make him careful 
 not to commit such transgressions, especially when, in addition to the 
 dread of the humiliation of a minute confession, he is deterred by fear 
 of the sacramental satisfaction or penance which his confessor may 
 and must impose. But even supposing that all the advantages are 
 gained for which the most strenuous advocates of this Romish practice 
 contend, they are too dearly purchased. The price is the surrender 
 of the penitent's liber^ as a man, the recognition of a blasphemous as- 
 sumption of a divine prerogative, and the fatal delusion that sins can 
 be blotted out of the book of God's remembrance, by means of a paltry 
 penance, imposed at the option of the confessor ! Satan would rejoice 
 to see all the stolen property in creation, restored on such terms ! 
 
 If the Romish priests were pure as angels, and as fully proof against 
 the seductive influences of temptation as the marble pillars in their 
 cathedral, it would still be unpardonable idolatry to confess to them, 
 because this is an act of worship, which belongs to God alone. But, 
 alas ! their reverences are most unfortunately, at best, only earthen 
 vessels ; and though they sit as God, in temples professedly dedicated 
 to the Most High, they do occasionally afford lamentable evidence that 
 they are men of like passions with the rest of their fellow-mortals. We 
 might remind our readers of facts illustrative of this remark, but they 
 are neither so few nor far between as to render specifications very ne- 
 cessary. Let it not be supposed, however, that we are so prejudiced 
 against Romish priests as to be unwilling to accord to them the praise 
 that is due ; we may as well acknowledge in this connection, the dis- 
 
488 CONCERNING INDULGENCES. 
 
 interested zeal of the holy fathers in the endowment of orphan asy- 
 lums, and the special and almost paternal reg-ard which they enter- 
 tain for the nephews and nieces, with which a kind Providence 
 bountifully supplies the defect of sons and daughters ; for of course it 
 is known that the reverend confessors are bound by a vow of perpetual 
 celibacy, which under pain of sacrilege they may not forget 
 
 But there is another view of the practical operation of the confes- 
 sional, which is calculated to awaken alarm. We are not surprised at 
 the strict injunction of secresy, because it is the only preservative of 
 the confessional. Penitents would not resort to the priest, if this in- 
 junction were removed. But we call attention to the presumption 
 which makes the authority of the confessional superior to all civil or 
 judicial authority, and which absolves the priest from all guilt in con- 
 cealing anything which he has learned in confession, although the life 
 or salvation of a man, or the ruin op the state should be involved in 
 his silence. To cap the climax, if questioned concerning it, to use the 
 language of Dens : " J^e must reply that he does not know it, and if it 
 is necessary, he must confirm the same with an oath ! Again : " if 
 a confessor be cited in a judicial case, that he may give his reason for 
 refusing absolution, he must protest that in this case, he acknowledges 
 no superior except God .'" If we are not mistaken, a case in point 
 was tried some years ago in the state of New York, in which the 
 court actually recognized the priest's scruples ; it is doubtful, however, 
 if a confessor were detected in a flat perju»jr by a Philadelphia 
 Court, whether his reverence would not have an opportunity of pre- 
 paring a treatise on fasting, according to the rules of the Moyamensing 
 Manual. The results of his experience would perhaps be very nearly 
 as valuable as the brilliant dissertations of Pope Benedict XIV., on the 
 drinking of chocolate, and the smoking of segars on a fast day ; and, 
 (which is a very great consideration,) the materials for the work 
 would be collected at the expense of the state, so that, if the priest 
 chose to be generous, he might devote the profits to the support of St. 
 Joseph's Orphan Asylum. The case as yet, however, is altogether 
 hypothetical, and we would not be understood as presuming to dictate 
 to a conscientious confessor. 
 
CONCERNING EXTREME UNCTION. 489 
 
 CHAPTER XLI. 
 
 Treatise concerning the Sacrament of Extreme 
 Unction. 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 " The names of the sacrament of extreme unction, are various : from 
 the matter, the Greeks call it holy oil ; from the matter and form to- 
 gether, it is called by the same, prayer with oil ; from the subject, 
 upon whom it is conferred, it is called by the Latins, the anointing- of 
 the sick, also, the sacrament of the departing ; from the effect which 
 it produces, it is called by the Council of Trent, the consummating sa- 
 erament of Penance. We preface according to our custom 
 
 77ie Decree of the Council of Florence for the instruction of the 
 Armenians. 
 " The fifth sacrament is extreme unction, the matter of which is 
 olive oil, blessed by the bishop : this sacrament ought not to be dis- 
 pensed except to a sick person whose death is apprehended ; who is to 
 be anointed on these parts : on the eyes, on account of vision ; on the 
 ears, on account of hearing ; on the nostrils, on account of scent ; on 
 the mouth, for taste or speech ; on the hands, for touching ; on the 
 feet, for walking; on the reins, for the pleasure, «&c. &c. — The 
 form of this sacrament is: Through this unction, and his own most 
 gracious mercy, may God pardon thee, whatever thou hast done amiss 
 through sight, &c., and likewise in the other members. The minister 
 of this sacrament is the priest : but the effect is the healing of the 
 mind, and in so far as is expedient, also, of the body itself. Concern- 
 ing this sacrament, the blessed Apostle James says, ch. v. 14, 15 : * Is 
 any sick among you? Let him bring in the priests of the church, and 
 let them pray over him, anointing him with oil, in the name of 
 the Lord ; and the prayer of faith shall save the sick man, and the 
 Lord shall raise him up ; and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven 
 him.' 
 
 Canons of the Council of Trent concerning Extreme Unction. 
 " 1. Whoever shall say that extreme unction is not truly and pro- 
 perly a sacrament, instituted by Christ our Lord, and promulgated by 
 the blessed Apostle James, but only a rite received from the fathers, or 
 a human invention ; let him be accursed ! 
 41 ^ 
 
490 CONCERNING EXTREME UNCTION. 
 
 " 2. Whoever shall say that the sacred anointing of the sick does 
 not confer grace nor remit sins, nor raise up the sick, but that it has 
 now ceased, as if the gift of healing existed only in past ages : let him 
 be accursed ! 
 
 " 3. Whoever shall say that the ceremony of extreme unction, and 
 the practice which the holy Roman Church observes, are repugnant to 
 the meaning of the blessed Apostle James, and that therefore they are 
 to be changed, and may be despised by Christians without sin ; let him 
 be accursed ! 
 
 " 4. Whoever shall say that the elders of the Church, who the bless- 
 ed James advises should be sent for to anoint the sick, are not priests 
 ordained by the bishop, but those who are the more advanced in age, 
 in any community ; and that on this account the proper minister of 
 extreme unction is not the priest alone ; let him be accursed !" 
 
 Extreme unction is defined as a sacrament in which the 
 sick man is anointed with holy oil by the priest, under a 
 prescribed form of words, for the healing of the mind and 
 body. It is proved to be a sacrament from the words of 
 James above quoted, from the definition of the councils of 
 Trent and Florence, and from the constant practice of the 
 Church, as well the Latin as the Greek : indeed, the Greek 
 schismatics themselves, admit this sacrament: but Luther 
 and Calvin have rejected it. That all the essentials of this 
 sacrament are designated by James, is demonstrated thus: 
 
 "By saying, (v. 14.) If any one is sicJe, he designates 
 the subject to be a person dangerously sick, and that he is 
 baptized ; by adding among you, that is the faithful : by say- 
 ing, let him bring in the priests, he intimates that the minis- 
 ter is a priest ; by these words, let them pray over him, and 
 the prayer of faith, he denotes its deprecative form ; by the 
 word anointing, he intimates that the proximate matter is 
 the unction, and by the following words, m^7t oil in the name 
 of the Lord, that the remote matter is oil that has been 
 blessed : in the words, shall save the sicJc man, and raise 
 him up, &c., it explains the effects of this sacrament. 
 
 " Obj. In this epistle, the question is discussed, merely 
 concerning the natural efficacy of the oil for healing bodily 
 diseases, and concerning the gift of healing, conferred gra- 
 tuitously; therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. 1. I deny the antecedent; because he would not, 
 in that case, have commanded the elders to be called, but 
 
CONCERNING EXTREME UNCTION. 491 
 
 the physicians, or those who have the gift of healing; which 
 was not given to all the elders, nor to them only. 
 
 " 2. The gift of healing was not given only for the sick, 
 of whom St. James treats, but also for the blind, the lame, &c. 
 
 " 3. The remission of sins, which St. James places as the 
 effect of this anointing, cannot be attributed to the natural 
 virtue of the oil, or to the gift of healing. The anointings 
 applied by the apostles, Mark vi. 13, " they anointed with oil 
 many that were sick, and healed them," were not sacramental, 
 because they referred only or principally, to the healing of 
 bodily disease : but the sacraments in themselves, pertain to 
 the soul, to the body by accident, and at most secondarily: 
 and hence, these anointings were only figures, by which this 
 sacrament was insinuated, as the council of Trent says, sess. 
 14, concerning extreme unction, ch. 1." 
 
 Was this sacrament instituted immediately hy Christ 7 
 "Yes: (!! !) it is inferred from the council of Trent^ sess. 
 14, &c., in which it teaches, that it was promulgated by St. 
 James ; it judged therefore, that it was instituted not by him, 
 but immediately by Christ. When did Christ institute it 7 
 The time is uncertain : probably however, he instituted it 
 after his resurrection, in the period of forty days, in which 
 he spoke to his disciples concerning the kingdom of God, or 
 concerning the affairs of the Church, and in which, as S. 
 Leo says, the great sacraments were confirmed. Probably 
 also, he instituted it after the sacrament of penance, of which 
 it is the perfection and consummation, had been instituted." 
 
 *' The oil of the sick, which is the matter of this sacra- 
 ment, together with the chrism and the oil of catechumens, 
 is solemnly blessed by the bishop, every year on the day of 
 the Lord's supper, who distributes .them to the archpresby- 
 ters, and they to the pastors ; for this purpose each pastor 
 brings three silver or pewter vessels, marked with letters for 
 the sake of distinction, in which silk or some other spongy 
 matter is usually deposited, in order to avoid the danger of 
 spilling. When fresh oils are brought, the old ones are 
 burned, and the ashes are sent into the sacristy, or if the 
 quantity is considerable, it may be consumed in a lamp, be- 
 fore the adorable sacrament," &c. 
 
 In case the oil blessed by the bishop should fail before 
 the annual period for preparing new has arrived, oil that 
 
492 CONCERNING EXTREME UNCTION. 
 
 has not been blessed may be mixed with it, but the quantity 
 must be less than the holy oil which remains. The proxi- 
 mate matter of the sacrament of extreme unction, is the 
 anointing, or the use and application of the oil. Although 
 the council of Florence requires the sick and dying to be 
 anointed on the loins, yet for modesty's sake, the breast, or 
 in females, the lower part of the throat has been substituted ; 
 •so that the unction is applied to the eyes, ears, nose, mouth 
 and hands, and then to the breast and the feet. 
 
 Here there appears to us to be something of a dilemma. Why has 
 the recommendation of the council of Florence been changed ? Was 
 it not an infallible, oecumenical council ? So the Church of Rome 
 would have us believe ; and yet for modesty's sake, the mode of admin- 
 istering this sacrament of Christ's own institution, has been changed ! 
 Therefore the council of Florence has recommended a practice, which 
 is too indecent even for Romish priests to perform, without material 
 modification ; and thus by their own act, they prove that the council 
 of Florence was immodest, and hence not infallible. If the mode 
 enjoined by this council, was suggested by the holy Spirit, what right 
 have the priests to modify it? We apprehend, that serious injury 
 must be done to the souls of the faithful, by this unwarrantable inno- 
 vation. If I were a believer and an advocate of extreme unction, I 
 would insist upon the literal fulfilment of the injunction of the council 
 of Florence, in order to obviate all risk of invalidating the sacrament. 
 The anointing upon the loins, has a special local signification, which 
 is entirely lost in the application of the holy oil upon the throat. 
 
 The feet are anointed on the upper part, lest the holy oil 
 might seem to be trodden under foot. The anointing of the 
 eyes is not done on the pupil, but on the eyelid ; the anoint- 
 ing for the sense of taste is performed on the lips, not on the 
 tongue. When the sick man has neither hands nor feet, the 
 unction must be made on that part of the body which is 
 nearest to where they ought to be. The back of the hands 
 must be anointed. Those who have been born blind must 
 also be anointed, on account of vision ; for though they 
 have never seen any thing, and consequently could not sin 
 by the organs of vision, yet they may have sinned by desir- 
 ing to see improper things. The unction may be performed 
 either with the thumb, or with a rod, at the option of the 
 minister. If there is danger of infecting the oil, a fresh bit 
 
CONCERNING EXTREME UNCTION. 493 
 
 of wood may be used at the time of each anointing, and 
 these must afterwards be burned. As for the wiping off of 
 the anointed organs, the pastorale prescribes-r-that the min- 
 ister or priest, after each unction, must wipe the anointed 
 parts with a fresh wad of silk or tow, and deposit them in a 
 clean vessel, and burn them; but if there is no fire ready, 
 the burning is entrusted to the servants. The five unctions 
 of the five senses are alone essential. The anointing of the 
 breast or feet is not essential ; so that the Mechlin pastoral 
 directory teaches, that when the five former have been ap- 
 plied, the mind of the priest may be easy, as the sick man 
 has now received the sacrament." (No. 4.) 
 
 The form of the sacrament of Extreme Unction is given 
 in the decree of the Council of Florence. 
 
 " Is the distinct expression of the sight and the other senses 
 essential 7 The affirmative answer is probable : hence, if the 
 priest should say whatever thou hast sinned by means of the 
 senses, the sacrament would be doubtful ; just as it would be 
 improper to administer baptism in this form : I baptize thee 
 in the name of the most Holy Trinity. The following form, 
 however, will be sufficient, in case of necessity : Through 
 this holy unction, and his own most gracious mercy, may 
 the Lord pardon thee whatsoever thou hast done amiss by 
 sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch." The proper subject 
 for extreme unction is a sick person who has attained to 
 years of discretion, and who has been baptized, and sacra- 
 mentally absolved. 
 
 The effects of this sacrament are — 1. Sanctifying grace. 
 2. Sacramental or actual graces. 3. The wiping off of the 
 remains of sins, and comfort of mind, by exciting in the 
 sick man great confidence in the divine mercy. 4. Remis- 
 sion of sins. 5. Healing of the body. This latter effect is 
 merely secondary, and the impediments to its taking place 
 are — 1. "The indisposition of the recipient. 2. The want 
 of faith or confidence in the recipient. 3. The want of faith 
 in the minister. 4. The too great progress of the disease, 
 so that health could not be restored except by a manifest 
 miracle, and against nature; for although the healing of the 
 body through this sacrament is performed by supernatural 
 efficacy, yet it ought not to be called miraculous, because it 
 is effected by an ordinary and mild operation, in a mode of 
 
494 CONCERNING EXTREME UNCTION. 
 
 operation similar to that of corporeal medicines. 5. The 
 ordinance of divine providence and justice otherwise dis- 
 posing." 
 
 Extreme Unction may be repeated as often as any one 
 falls into a deadly sickness, but not in one and the same 
 danger of death : i. e. the sickness must be at different times. 
 The priest is the proper minister of this sacrament, and is 
 bound under pain of grievous sin to administer it to the sick 
 of his parish. 
 
 The sacrament of extreme unction, is an extreme absurdity. The 
 practice of anointing with oil in the Jewish Church, was a common 
 sign by which an extraordinary influence was designated. When 
 Christ first sent out the apostles to preach the gospel, we learn from 
 the divine record, that he gave them power to cast out unclean spirits, 
 and to heal the sick, and this latter faculty was connected with anoint- 
 ing of oil. " They cast out many devils, and anointed with oil many 
 that were sick, and healed them." Mark vi. 13. What connection 
 there was between the anointing and the healing, we cannot pretend 
 to determine ; but it was manifestly significant, and was probably 
 intended to illustrate a part of the Jewish ritual. This power was 
 continued to the apostles after the Saviour's ascension ; and they had 
 not only received the heavenly unction of the Holy Ghost, but they 
 could impart his influence to others, on whom they laid hands for that 
 purpose; and in this manner, elders of churches were appointed. The 
 Apostle James wrote his epistle to the Christian converts from Juda- 
 ism, and he informs them that the divine influence, with which some 
 of their nation had been favoured, from the institution of the Jewish 
 Church, was still continued in the overseers of the Church, who were 
 endowed with certain miraculous powers, and that the exercise of these 
 powers, was accompanied by the familiar sign of anointing with oil. 
 This ceremony, to the mind of a Jew, would be important and signi- 
 ficant, though it might not be to us. The converts then are exhorted 
 to avail themselves of this extraordinary power, whilst it was con- 
 tinned among them ; and are directed to use it in sickness, that they 
 might be healed. The saving of the sick, according to James, evi- 
 dently means their restoration to health, for it is immediately added, 
 the Lord shall raise him up. Here then is the vast and irreconcileable 
 discrepancy between the ceremony described by the apostle, and the 
 Romish sacrament of extreme unction. The apostolic rite was per- 
 formed with a view to the restoration or healing of the sick ; the 
 popish sacrament is administered to those only who are in danger of 
 
CONCERNING EXTREME UNCTION. 495 
 
 death ; and as Peter Dens informs us, with a view to their restoration 
 to health, although in consequence of divers impediments, this latter 
 object is usually not attained. In the apostolic practice, the anointing 
 of oil never failed in connection with the prayer of faith, to raise up 
 the sick. James speaks of sickness in connection with sins, and in 
 the primitive church, such expressions of divine displeasure were not 
 uncommon, as we see from the history of the Church at Corinth ; 
 1 Cor. xi. 30. This power of healing diseases, with which Christ 
 himself uniformly connected the forgiveness of sins, was a fulfilment 
 of the Saviour's promise. " These signs shall follow them that be- 
 lieve : in my name shall they cast out devils ; they shall speak with 
 new tongues ; they shall take up serpents ; and if they drink any 
 deadly thing, it shall not hurt them ; they shall lay hands on the sick^ 
 and they shall recover^ These miraculous endowments were to be 
 conferred on those that shall believe, not on the apostles alone ; they 
 were gifts which belonged to the Church in that age, and were given 
 for her establishment. If the priests have this power, let them show 
 it. They will not taste a poisoned wafer after its consecration, nor 
 will they drink wine in which poison has been mixed, although the 
 ancient promise, upon part of which they have based the sacrament 
 of extreme unction, assures them that believe, that " if they drink any 
 deadly thing, it shall not hurt them." If the priests can cast out 
 devils, (and I know any one of them professes to be a match for a 
 whole legion of them, when he is armed with a pot of holy water), 
 and handle serpents, and drink poison without being hurt, and heal 
 the sick by laying hands on them, they may then with propriety, 
 employ the significant sign of the anointing with oil; but if they can. 
 not perform these miracles, the ceremony of the unction becomes 
 extreme mummery ! 
 
 Ecclesiastical burial is to be denied according to the Roman 
 ritual, to the following classes of unhappy human beings. To Pagans, 
 Jews, and all infidels, heretics and their abettors, apostates from the 
 Christian faith and schismatics ; and some assert that a strong suspi- 
 cion of heresy or infidelity, is sufficient to exclude from ecclesiastical 
 burial. Those who have been publicly excommunicated by the greater 
 excommunication ; so too such as have been by name interdicted ; 
 suicides, unless they have given signs of penitence before death; ma- 
 nifest arid public sinners, such as usurers, and those who have notori- 
 ously failed to receive the sacraments of confession and communion 
 at Easter, and who have departed without any signs of penitence, as 
 well as persons killed in a duel, and infants which have died without 
 baptism, unless still in the womb of the mother, are all excluded from 
 consecrated ground. Whether Catechumens may be ecclesiastically 
 interred, is a controverted question. 
 
496 CONCERNING ORDERS. 
 
 CHAPTER XLII. 
 Treatise of the Sacrament of Orders. 
 
 Decree of the Council of Florence for the instruction of 
 the Armenians. 
 
 " The sixth sacrament is that of orders, whose matter is that by the 
 delivery of which, the order is conferred ; as the priesthood is con- 
 ferred, by the delivery of the cup with the wine, and of the plate with 
 the bread ; the deaconship by giving the book of the gospels ; the 
 subdeaconship by the delivery of the empty cup with an empty plate 
 put upon it ; and likewise of the rest by the indication of the things 
 pertaining to their peculiar ministries. The form of the priesthood is : 
 Receive the power of offering sacrifice in the church for the living and 
 for the dead in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy 
 Ghost ; and so of the forms of the other orders as it is contained at 
 length in the Roman Pontifical. The ordinary minister of this sacra- 
 ment is the Bishop. The effect is an increase of grace, so that the 
 person may be a proper minister. 
 
 Canons of the Council of Trent concerning Orders. 
 
 1. " Whoever shall say that in the New Testament, there is not a 
 visible and external priesthood : or that there is not any power of con- 
 secrating and offering the true body and blood of the Lord, and of 
 remitting and retaining sins : but only the office and naked ministry 
 of preaching the gospel ; or that they who do not preach are surely 
 not priests ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 2. "Whoever shall say that besides the peiesthood there are not 
 other orders in the Catholic church, both greater and inferior, by 
 which as by certain steps, the priestliood may be attained ; let him be 
 accursed ! 
 
 3. •' Whoever shall say that orders, or sacred ordination, is not truly 
 and properly a sacrament instituted by Christ the Lord ; or that it is 
 a certain human invention, devised by men ignorant of ecclesiastical 
 things, or that it is only a certain ceremony of choosing the ministers 
 of the word of God and of the sacraments : let him be accursed ! 
 
CONCERNING MARRIAGE. 497 
 
 4. " Whoever shall say that by sacred ordination the Holy Spirit is 
 not given, and that therefore the Bishops say in vain, Receive the Holy 
 Ghost : or that by it character is not impressed : or that he who has 
 once been a priest may again become a layman : let him be accursed ! 
 
 5. " Whoever shall say that the sacred unction v^rhich the church 
 uses in holy ordination is not only not required but is contemptible 
 and pernicious ; likewise also the other ceremonies of orders ; let him 
 be accursed ! 
 
 6. " Whoever shall say that in the Catholic church there is not a 
 hierarchy instituted by divine appoihtment, which consists of Bishops, 
 priests, and ministers ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 7. " Whoever shall say that Bishops are not superior to priests, or 
 that they have not the power of confirming and ordaining; or 
 that that which they have is common to them with the priests ; or 
 that orders conferred by them without the consent or call of the people 
 or the secular power are null and void ; or that they who have been nei- 
 ther duly ordained nor sent by ecclesiastical and canonical power, but 
 come from some other source, are lawful ministers of the word and 
 sacraments ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 8. " Whoever shall say that the Bishops who are appointed by the 
 authority of the Roman Pontiff, are not lawful and true Bishops, but a 
 human invention ; let him be accursed !" 
 
 CHAPTER XLIII. 
 
 Teeatise concerning Marriage. 
 
 Decree of the Council of Florence for the instruction of 
 the Armenians. 
 
 " The seventh is the sacrament of Marriage, which is a sign of the 
 union of Christ and the Church, according to the Apostle, who says, 
 Eph. V. 32, This is a great sacrament; but I speak in Christ and in 
 the church. The efficient cause of marriage jjaually is the mutual 
 consent expressed by words, &c. A threefold advantage of marriage 
 is assigned. The first is, receiving and educating children for the 
 worship of God ; the second is faith, which the one of the married per- 
 sons should preserve for the other ; the third is the indivisibility of 
 42 
 
498 CONCERNING MARRIAGE. 
 
 marriage, because it signifies the indivisible union of Christ and the 
 Church ; although on account of fornication it may be lawful to make 
 a separation from the bed, yet it is not proper to contract another 
 marriage : as the bond of matrimony legitimately contracted is 
 perpetual." 
 
 Canons of the Council of Trent concerning Marriage. 
 
 1. " Whoever shall say that marriage is not truly and properly one 
 of the seven sacraments of the Evangelical laws instituted by Christ 
 the Lord, but that it is invented by men in the church and does not 
 confer grace ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 2. " Whoever shall say that it is lawful for Christians to have seve- 
 ral wives at once and that this is forbidden by no divine law ; let him 
 be accursed ! 
 
 3. " Whoever shall say that only those degrees of relationship and 
 affinity, which are expressed in Leviticus can hinder marriage from 
 being contracted, and annul the contract ; and that the church cannot 
 dispense in any of them, or appoint that more may hinder and annul ; 
 let him be accursed ! 
 
 4. " Whoever shall say that the Church could not constitute im- 
 pediments annulling marriage, or that in constituting them, she has 
 erred ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 5. " Whoever shall say that the bond of marriage may be dissolved 
 on account of heresy, or mutual dislike or voluntary absence from the 
 husband or wife, let him be accursed ! 
 
 6. " Whoever shall say that a marriage solemnized, but not con- 
 summated is not annulled by the solemn profession of a religious order 
 by one of the parties ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 4. " Whoever shall say, that the Church errs, when she has taught 
 and teaches that according to the evangelical and apostolical doctrine, 
 the bond of marriage cannot be dissolved on account of the adultery of 
 one or the other of the parties, and that neither of them, not even the 
 innocent party who has given no cause for the -adultery, may contract 
 another marriage, whilst the party is living, and that he commits 
 adultery, who marries another after putting away his adulterous wife, 
 or she, who marries another after putting away her adulterous hus- 
 band ; let him be accursed ! 
 
 8. " Whoever shall say that the Church is in error, when for many 
 reasons she decrees that a separation may be made between married 
 persons as to the bed, or as to intercourse either for a certain or an 
 uncertain time ; let him be accursed I 
 
 9. " Whoever shall say that the clergy constituted in sacred order 
 
CONCERNING MARRIAGE. 499 
 
 or regulars, who have solemnly professed chastity may contract maf- 
 riage, and that the contract is valid, notwithstanding ecclesiastical 
 law, or vow, and that to maintain the opposite is nothing else than to 
 condemn marriage, and that all may contract marriage who do not 
 think that they have the gift of chastity, even though they have vowed 
 it ; let him be accursed : as God does not deny this to those who seek 
 it aright, nor does he suffer us to be tempted above what we are able 
 to bear. 
 
 10. "Whoever shall say that the married state is to be preferred to 
 a state of virginity, or celibacy, and that it is not better and more blessed 
 to remain in virginity or celibacy, than to be joined in marriage ; let 
 him be accursed ! 
 
 11. "Whoever shall affirm that the prohibition of the solemnization 
 of marriage at certain times of the year is a tyrannical superstition, 
 borrowed from the superstitions of the pagans, or shall condemn the 
 benedictions and other ceremonies, which the Church uses at those 
 times : let him be accursed ! 
 
 12. " Whoever shall affirm that matrimonial causes do not belong 
 to the ecclesiastical judges ; let him be accursed !" 
 
 The Treatise on marriage is a developement of the peculiar views 
 contained in the decree of the Council of Florence and the canons of 
 the Council of Trent, — and a translation would not repay me for the 
 labour of writing, nor the reader for the trouble of perusing such chap- 
 ters as are fit for the public eye. Topics are discussed in this con- 
 nection, to which decency almost forbids me even to allude. I should 
 disgust every modest person and for ever forfeit his good opinion, if I 
 were to spread before an English reader the abominable obscenity in 
 which Peter Dens wallows with perfect self-complacency. I will, 
 however, give a few extracts in Latin, and if the priests think proper 
 they may supply an English translation for the benefit of the curious. 
 The following questions among the rest are gravely and systematically 
 discussed. 
 
 An copula carnalis inter conjuges licite habetur propter solam volup- 
 tatem ? Quantum est peccatum exercere actum conjugalem ob solam 
 voluptatem ? An licet actum conjugalem exercere partim ob debitum 
 finem, putd. generationem prolis, et partim ob dclectationem ? An 
 licitum est petere debitum conjugall ex solo fine vitandi propriara 
 incontincntiam, non concurrente fine generationis prolis, vel redditionis 
 debiti ?**»****« 
 
500 CONCERNING MARRIAGE. 
 
 Colligitur ex dictis, petitionem debiti esse venialiter malam, si uxor 
 sit senex, aut sterilis, idque sive vir, sive uxor petal ; quia non potest 
 intendi prolis generatio : licite tamen reddi potest, quia redditio excusa- 
 tur ob bonum fidei. *»*#»« 
 
 Certum est conjuges inter se peccare posse, etiam graviter, contra virtu- 
 tem castitatis, sive continentiae ratione quaruradam circumstantiarum. 
 In particular! autem definire quaB sint mortales quae solum veniales, 
 perobscurum est, nee eadem omnium sententia ; ut vel ideo sollicite 
 persuadendum sit conjugatis, ut recordentur se esse filios sanctorum, 
 quos decet in sanctitate conjugali filios procreare. Quidam auctores 
 circumstantias circa actum conjugalem praecipue observandas, expri- 
 munt his versibus. 
 
 Sit modus et finis, sine damno, solve, cohsBre, 
 Sit locus et tempus, tactus, nee spernito votum. 
 
 1. Ergo debet servari modus, sive *i/MS, qui dupliciter invertitur : 1, 
 Si non servetur debitum vas, sed copula habeatur in vase praepostero, 
 vel quocumque alio non naturali : quod semper mortale est, spectans 
 ad sodomiam minorem seu imperfectam : idque tenendum contra quos- 
 dam laxistas, sive copula ibi consummetur, sive tantum inchoetur, 
 consummanda in vase naturali. 
 
 2, Modus sive situs, invertitur, sic tamen, ut servetur debitum vas 
 ad copulam a natura ordinatum, si v. g. fiat accedendo praepostere a 
 latere, stando, sedendo, vel si vir sit succubus. Modus is mortalis est 
 si inde suboriatur periculura poUutionis respectu alterutrius : sive 
 quando periculum est, ne semen perdatur, prout saepe accidit, dum 
 actus exercetur stando, sedendo, aut viro succumbente : si absit, et 
 sufficienter proecaveatur istud periculum ex communi sententia id non 
 est mortale. Est autem veniale ex gravioribus, ciim sit inversio 
 ordinis naturae. Estque generatim modus ille, sine causa taliter 
 eoeundi, graviter a confessariis reprehendendus. Si tamen ob justam 
 rationem situm naturalem conjuges immutent, secludaturque dictum 
 periculum nullum erit peccatum, &c." The following question is also 
 asked : " An uxor potest se tactibus excitare ad seminationem, si a 
 copula conjugali se retraxerit maritus, postquam ipse seminavit, sed 
 antequam seminaverit uxor ?" 
 
 " Confessarius potest etiam conjugatos interrogare sub his terminis:- 
 Confidis, quod utaris matrimonio honesto modo, non plus facicndo quam 
 necessarium est ad generandam prolcm ? Non habes specialia dubia 
 quae te angunt? Si autem poenitens det occasionem ulterius interro- 
 
CONCERNING ANTICHRIST. 501 
 
 gandi, inquirat confessarius, an sibi vel comparti causaverit periculum 
 pollutionis, vel perditionis seminis." 
 
 The atrocity of these extracts will appear infinitely more flagrant 
 when it is remembered that the confessor institutes inquiries in relation 
 to all these things in order that he may ascertain the amount of guilt 
 which his penitent has contracted ! Language cannot portray the 
 deep indignation and abhorrence with which every enlightened and 
 virtuous mind must regard the ineffable arrogance and impudence of 
 the Romish priesthood. Would to God that the Roman Catholic laity 
 for whom as individuals we would cherish no other feelings than those 
 of the utmost kindness, could but view these things in the light in 
 which we see them ! 
 
 CHAPTER XLIV. 
 
 In the Treatise which treats of the four last things, viz. death, 
 judgment, hell and heavenly glory, we find in No. 15, the following 
 remarks : 
 
 Concerning Antichrist. 
 
 " Who is here meant by Antichrist ? Ans. Some particular very 
 wicked man, who will arise in the last days, saying that he is Messiah, 
 and showing himself as God, 2. Thess. ii. 4. As to his rise and 
 country nothing certain is held, except that Damascenus hands down 
 the tradition that he will be born from fornication, and the ancients 
 supposed that he will arise from the tribe of Dan, because Rev. vii. the 
 tribe of Dan is not numbered with those who are to be «aved. 
 
 " He will excite terrible persecution against the Church, and will 
 perform many lying wonders and signs, as is said, 2 Thess. ii. 9. 
 in order to confirm the false doctrine. His persecution will last as is 
 thought for three and a half years according to Dan. vii. 25 : ' And 
 they shall be delivered into his hand until a time, and times, and half 
 a time.' At length the Lord Jesus will kill him with the spirit of his 
 mouth, 2 Thess. ii. 8. 
 
 " From these remarks it is plain how foolish is the calumny of here- 
 tics of our time, who are not afraid to say that the Roman Pontiff is 
 Antichrist. For : 
 
 1. "Antichrist will come at the end of the world ; the Roman Pon- 
 ■42* 
 
502 CONCERNING PURGATORY. 
 
 tiff rules the church now upwards of 1800 years, by a continuous suc- 
 cession. 2. He will be a particular person : there is a great series of 
 Popes. 3.. He will call himself Christ ; the Pope calls himself Christ's 
 vicar. 4. He will exalt himself above all that is called God : The 
 Pope calls himself the servant of the servants of God. 5. The advent 
 of Antichrist will be in all power, and signs, and lying wonders : 
 no history relates this of the Roman Pontiffs. Some of them indeed 
 have shone forth by true miracles, but many other saints by greater : 
 nor among the Pontiffs was any distinguished by greater miracles 
 than St. Peter : will they peradventure say that Christ himself appoint- 
 ed Antichrist over his own Church ? 
 
 " It is plain also, that they are in error, who have supposed that 
 Nero or Mahomet was Antichrist ; because he will come only at the 
 end of the world. 
 
 "06/. L John ii. 18, it is said: 'Ye have heard that Antichrist 
 Cometh ; therefore he will not come at the end of the world.' 
 
 " Arts. Cometh in the present is put for will come on account of 
 the certainty of the event. 
 
 " You will reply : Immediately after the words cited it is maintained, 
 Even now there are many Antichrists ; therefore, &c. 
 
 " Ans. By many Antichrists, John means heretics, on account of 
 their resemblance to Antichrist ; for, Antichrist signifies one who is 
 contrary to Christ." 
 
 N. B. Our reasons for conferring the title of Antichrist upon his 
 Holiness will be seen at the close of this chapter. 
 
 Of Purgatory. (No. 25.) 
 
 " What is purgatory ? Ans. It is the place in which the souls of 
 departed just people, which were obnoxious to temporal punishments, 
 endure sufficient suffering. It is said, endure sufficient suffering, 
 because as souls there are beyond the state of probation they can 
 merit no longer, nor properly satisfy for the punishment that is 
 due, but they satisfy only in punishment, or expiate the appoint- 
 ed penalty : so that they cannot help and liberate themselves 
 from punishment, except by enduring sufficient suffering. What 
 ought we to believe concerning purgatory ? The council of Trent, 
 sess. 25, in the commencement of the decree concerning purgatory, 
 has settled two things which are to be believed, namely that there is a 
 purgatory, and that the souls there detained are assisted by the suf- 
 frages of the faithful, chiefly, however, by the acceptable sacrifice of 
 
CONCERNING PURGATORY. 503 
 
 the altar. This faith the Greeks also professed in the council of 
 Florence. In relation to the remaining questions concerning purga- 
 tory, nothing has been settled." 
 
 The proof texts of the existence of purgatory are, 2 Mace. xii. ♦' It 
 is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead that 
 they may be loosed from sins." Eccli. vii. 37, " Restrain not grace 
 from the dead." Tobias, iv. 18, " Lay out thy bread upon the burial 
 of a just man." Matt. xii. 32, where Christ says of the sin against 
 the Holy Ghost : " It shall not be forgiven him either in this world or 
 in the world to come." 1 Cor. iii. 12, " Now if any man build upon 
 
 this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble ; 
 
 and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is ; if any 
 
 man's work burn, he shall suffer loss, but he himself shall be saved, 
 yet so as by fire, i. e. by the punishment of fire. By wood, hay and 
 stubble, venial sins are denoted : although indeed the text may seem to 
 treat directly of the fire of conflagration, nevertheless purgatory is 
 rightly evinced from it by parity of reason : for if then the souls of 
 the just must be purged from the guilt of the punishment of venial 
 sins by that fire, the souls of the just obnoxious to a similar guilt ought 
 likewise to be purged by fire." 
 
 " St. Augustine wrote a whole book concerning care for the dead, 
 in which he teaches, both that there is a purgatory, and that the souls 
 there detained, are helped by the suffrages of the faithful : nor did he 
 only teach it, he practised it also, in respect to his deceased mother, 
 , S. Monica, as he himself relates, Bk. 9. conf. cap. 13. The aforesaid 
 doctrine may be proved also by the following reasons. 
 
 " First ; when a fault has been remitted, there frequently remain 
 temporal punishments to be expiated ; and if these are not paid, in 
 such a case justice demands, that a person expiate them after this life ; 
 lest otherwise they should be equal, who die with a great debt of pun- 
 ishments, and those who die with none. 
 
 " Second ; it may happen that a man dies in venial sin : but in such 
 a case this sin will indeed be remitted, as to the fault, by the act of 
 charity which the soul elicits at the first instant of its separation from 
 the body, as S. Thom. teaches. But by this act of charity, the liability 
 to punishment will be neither removed nor diminished ; and therefore 
 satisfaction ought to be made for it in purgatory. St. Thomas in the 
 passage quoted, gives as a reason, that as after this life there is no state 
 of meriting, this act of delight in them, takes away indeed the impedi- 
 ment of venial sin, yet it does not merit either absolution or a diminu- 
 tion of punishment, as in this life." 
 
 " Where is purgatory ? The ordinary place of purgatory, which is 
 
504 CONCERNING PURGATORY. 
 
 properly and commonly understood by the name of purgatory, is under 
 the earth, near to hell." The punishment of purgatory is twofold : 
 one of loss^ the other of sense, but both temporal. The punishment 
 of loss, is merely a delay of the beatific vision, as a punishment of 
 sins. " Is the punishment of sense in purgatory caused by material 
 five ? The opinion of the Latins is steadfast, and is to be retained, 
 that in purgatory there is material fire, similar to the fire of hell ; 
 hence the Church asks for the souls .of the faithful, not only a place 
 of light and peace, but also of coolness against the heat of the fire. 
 However, this opinion is not of the faith, as the Greeks in the council 
 of Florence maintained, that in purgatory there is not real fire, but 
 that it is only a place full of hardships and sorrows, and that by these, 
 the punishment of sense is occasioned, and yet they were not con- 
 demned either in the council of Florence or of Trent. 
 
 " How great is the punishment of purgatory ? St. Thomas teaches, 
 that both punishments of purgatory, as well of loss as of sense, exceed 
 all the punishments of this life. S. Bonaventure and Bcllarmine, teach 
 that the greatest punishment of purgatory, is indeed more severe than 
 the greatest punishment of this world ; not however, that the least 
 punishment of purgatory is greater than the greatest of this life. At 
 all events, although this thing is uncertain, it is still certain that the 
 punishment of purgatory is very grievous and bitter : as is plain, both 
 from the solicitude of the Church, which exhorts us to works of satis- 
 faction, and to earn indulgences, and because the future world is a 
 world of retribution and punishment; also from the opinion of the 
 holy Fathers. The punishment of purgatory is more mild than that 
 of hell. It is also greatly alleviated by the friendship of God, and the 
 certainty of obtaining glory, as also by the resignation of the sufferers 
 to the most righteous will of God. St. Thomas teaches that the souls 
 in purgatory are not harassed by devils, because they have triumphed 
 over them ; nor also by the good angels, because they would not so 
 grievously afflict their own citizens." 
 
 All are not equally punished in purgatory : but according to the 
 debt, the punishment both of loss and of sense, will be greater or less. 
 Whether the punishment gradually becomes less severe, is uncertain ; 
 Bellarmine and Sylvius maintain that it does. The length of time 
 during which souls are detained in purgatory is not known; neither 
 are all souls punished equally long ; the duration of their suffering is 
 graduated in proportion to their guilt. They are certain of their sal- 
 vation, and are confirmed in grace, so that they cannot lose it. They 
 Bufl'er with consuumiate patience, and are constantly exercising acta 
 
CONCERNING PURGATORY. 505 
 
 of charity, faith and hope, but they merit nothing by these acts. There 
 can be no doubt that the souls in purgatory pray for themselves; whe- 
 ther they pray for us is doubtful; but Bellarmine, Estius and Sylvius, 
 affirm that they do, especially for those who pray for them ; and 
 although these souls do not know who of us prays for them, this is no 
 objection, because they may pray for all who pray for them in general ; 
 besides they have the knowledge which they had gained before their 
 departure, and may be guided in some measure by that. Whether the 
 souls in purgatory may be invoked, is not altogether clear, Steyaert 
 says nay, Bellarmine says yea. 
 
 The communion of saints shows very evidently, that souls in pur- 
 gatory may be assisted by the suffrages of the living. The militant 
 and the suffering Church sympathize with each other. Besides the 
 constant, perpetual, and universal practice of the Church, abundantly 
 proves that the suffering Church is assisted by the prayers, &c., of the 
 faithful upon earth. The principal means of assisting the souls in 
 purgatory, are, above all — the sacrifice of the mass ; then indulgences 
 applied to the dead ; and finally, prayers, alms, and any other good 
 works performed from charity. It is very probable that the suffrages 
 infallibly benefit those deceased souls for whom they are offered ; but 
 it is not so clear whether the whole benefit is thus applied. The 
 objection that the souls of the rich are in a better condition in purga- 
 tory, than those of the poor, is obviated amongst the rest, by the sug- 
 gestion, that perhaps the deficiency of masses, &c., for the poor, " is 
 compensated by this, that God applies to them the suffrages made for 
 those, who are either damned, or already in heaven," to neither of 
 which classes, suffrages can be of any benefit. Suffrages are not 
 made for baptized children, who have died before the use of reason. 
 When masses are said for them, it is only by way of solemn protesta- 
 tion of the belief of their resurrection, and as an expression of thanks 
 for the benefit conferred on them. 
 
 The belief of purgatory is enjoined upon the members of the Ro- 
 mish Church as an article of faith, according to the bull of Pope 
 Pius IV. in which the following confession is made : " I do constantly 
 hold that there is a purgatory, and that the souls there detained are 
 helped by the suffrages of the faithful." The word purgatory is deri- 
 ved from the Latin verb purgo, I cleanse, purge, refine, &c. Now in 
 this strict and literal sense the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ is the 
 true purgatory — for he is said, Heb. i. 3 ; " by himself to have purged 
 away our sins." And again, 1 John i. 7 ; " The blood of Jesus Christ 
 cleanseth us from all sin." But in an inferior sense, afflictions, and 
 
r)06 CONCERNING PURGATORY. 
 
 faith, and the influences of the Holy Spirit and the preaching of the 
 word, are said to purge and purify. 
 
 Amid all the uncertainty with which this subject is invested, we are 
 told that there are two things, which the faithful must believe, the one 
 is that there is a purgatory, and the other that the souls of the faithful 
 there detained are aided by the suffrages of their brethren on earth. 
 The first proof which Peter Dens offers is the passage from Judas 
 Macchabaeus. " It is therefore a holy and a salutary thought to 
 pray for the dead that they may be loosed from sins." To this we 
 answer : 
 
 1. The book is apocryphal, and therefore of no authority in any 
 matter of faith. 
 
 2. This act of Judas, even supposing it were precisely what Papists 
 affirm, cannot justify prayers for the dead, any more than the suicide 
 of Rasias, xiv. 41, which Judas applauds, (v. 42,) proves that it is 
 " a holy and salutary thought," for a man to kill himself, when he is 
 in danger of being taken prisoner. 
 
 3. In the original Greek Text the words are -rrpotrdyeiv ir^pi ufiapnas 
 ■&vcr/av, which are rendered in the vulgate pro peccatis mortuorum sac- 
 rificium &c., which is a most unwarrantable liberty, for literally the 
 original means to offer a sacrifice for sin; which may very properly 
 be understood as implying that Judas made a propitiation for the dead, 
 lest for their sin God should punish the rest of the army, and if so, the 
 words " that they may be loosed from sins," would refer not to the 
 dead, but to the living. Now Judas did this either against the Law or 
 in accordance with it ; if pgainst it, he is not to be imitated ; if accord- 
 ing to the Law, we ask the erudite priests to show us the authority in 
 the Levitical law, for their sacrifices for the dead. 
 
 The next passage we notice is from Tobit, iv. 18, where Tobias 
 requires bread and wine to be placed on a righteous man's sepulchre ; 
 i. e. we suppose, he called together the poor, and gave them alms that 
 they might pray for the soul of the deceased. 
 
 The advocates of purgatory must be sorely pressed for evidence if 
 they look for it in this passage of the Book of Tobit ; for they ought 
 to know that it was customary among the Jews to comfort the poor 
 mourning relatives of the deceased by giving them a kind of funeral 
 banquet ; hence the force of the language, Jer. xvi. 5, 7 ; " Thus saith 
 the Lord, Enter not into the house of mourning, neither go to lament 
 nor bemoan them : for I have taken away my peace from this people, 
 neither shall men give them the cup of consolation to drink for their 
 father or their mother." 
 
CONCERNING ANTICHRIST. 507 
 
 " Another argument for purgatory is based upon the language of 
 Christ, Matt. xii. 32; "Whoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it 
 shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to 
 come." In reply, we remark : 
 
 1. The words "seculum futurum," or the world to come, are never 
 used to denote the time between death and the last day, but invariably 
 designate either the gospel dispensation, or the last day, or the condi- 
 tion subsequent to the judgment, Luke xx. 35, &,c. 
 
 2. It is not logical to infer an absolute affirmative from two nega- 
 tives ; V. g. *' this sin shall be forgiven neither in this world, nor in 
 the world to come," therefore, some sins shall be forgiven in the world 
 to come. This is a specimen of the close reasoning of Romish 
 theologians. 
 
 3. The meaning of these words is evident from the parallel passages 
 in Mark iii. 29, and Luke xii. 10, where it is said that this sin " shall 
 never be forgiven ; " and again " shall not be forgiven." And at all 
 events the passage will not sustain the Romish doctrine, because in 
 purgatory sins are not forgiven but expiated by suffering. 
 
 " What," says Archbishop Tillotson, " have we here to do with 
 remission of sins? Purgatory is a place not where sins are remitted 
 but where they are punished with the greatest severity. Nay, what 
 is still more, punished after they are remitted, nay, what is still more 
 extraordinary, therefore punished, because they are remitted ; for if 
 the guilt were not remitted, the sinner could not go to purgatory, nor 
 have the favour of being punished there." 
 
 In concluding this work, I cannot offer anything more appropriate 
 than the evidences, which conspire to prove that the Head of the 
 Romish Church is really par excellence the Antichrist spoken of in the 
 word of God. The Greek preposition avn admit§ of a two-fold inter- 
 pretation; it sometimes signifies for, or in the place of, implying a 
 vicegerency or subordination; thus in profane authors we read of 
 avTi (ia<Ti\evs and avucrTpaTrjyos, which designate the officer next to the 
 King or Captain. This signification Peter Dens carefully omits, lest 
 ^nfichrist might be found after all to mean Christ's vicar. The word 
 is, however, more frequently employed as signifying against, and as 
 denoting opposition. In either of these senses, and in both conjointly, 
 the Pope is emphatically Antichrist. We admit that the name may 
 be used in its common acceptation to denote all the adversaries of 
 Christ, and thus as the Apostle John says, there may be " many Anti- 
 christs," but it is evidently employed with special reference to some 
 particular apostasy eminent for wickedness and for the bitterness of 
 
508 CONCERNING ANTICHRIST. 
 
 its opposition to Christ. The fanciful theories of Romish autliors on 
 tliis subject show the difficulty which it presents to them. One main- 
 tains that Antichrist will be born of a Virgin by the agency of the 
 Devil; another that he will be a devil incarnate, assuming false flesh 
 from a false virgin ; another that he shall be a devil-man, partaking of 
 the nature of Satan and man ; another that Nero shall rise again and 
 become Antichrist. Some have said tlie Turk is Antichrist, and 
 others have imagined that he shall be a Jew, the son of Satan, and of a 
 woman of the tribe of Dan. But these are certainly not the character- 
 istics, which the word of God designates as the peculiarities of Anti- 
 christ, our enemies themselves being witness. Now, when we affirm 
 that the Pope is Antichrist, we do not mean all the Bishops of Rome 
 from the times of the Apostles, but only since the defection of the 
 Church. This apostasy commenced in the fourth century, which was 
 a period of gross corruption of the Church. Jerome, A. D. 390, com- 
 plains of the avarice and corruption of the clergy, and of the prohibi- 
 tion of MARRIAGES and MEATS : and Augustine laments, A. D. 399, that 
 the Church was fallen from her purity. But these were only the pre- 
 parations for the rise of the Man of Sin. The Pontiff* had not yet 
 gained supreme power ; the civil authority of the Roman state still 
 hindered, and therefore wasjirst to be taken out of the way, 2. Thess. 
 ii. 6, 7. When Jerome heard of the capture of Rome by Alaric, the 
 King of the Goths, he expected the coming of Antichrist. In his 
 epistle to Ageruchia he says : He that letteth is removed, and shall we 
 not know that Antichrist is near at hand? Some designate the 
 year 606, as the period of the first revelation of Antichrist, when Pope 
 Boniface III. by the help of the rebel and murderer Phocas, assumed 
 the title of Universal Bishop. Others refer it to the times of Pepin 
 and Charlemagne about the year 750. We call the Pope, Antichrist, 
 by way of distinction, as he is the head of the Antichristian apostasy ; 
 and it will not be denied that it is a common thing in Scripture to 
 designate a body politic, state, or succession of men J?y a particular 
 person or individual. Thus Deut. xvii. 14, 20 ; the king of Israel is 
 used to denote all the kings of Israel. Num. xxxv. 25, 28 ; by the 
 High Priest is to be understood any High Priest in a regular 
 course of succession. In Daniel vii. 1, 3 ; each beast signifies 
 a multitude of men in a succession under one government, which 
 lasted for ages. Rev. xii. 1 ; the state of the Church is indicated 
 by the figure of a woman in travail, and afterwards by a woman 
 in the wilderness, &c., and thus the Popes in succession are 
 designated in the word of God as the head of the Antichristian 
 apostasy, although there have been a great series of Popes ; and thus 
 
CONCERNING ANTICHRIST. 509 
 
 we dispose of Peter Dens' second objection. The rest shall be attend- 
 ed to in due season, though for convenience sake we may notice them 
 m an order different from that in which they are stated. We pro- 
 ceed to show that the great characteristics of Antichrist as delineated 
 by the Holy Spirit in the word of God, are all found in the Romish 
 apostasy. 
 
 1. Is Antichrist denominated " the man op sin, the son of perdi- 
 tion," 2 Thess. ii. 3 ? Witness the horrible lives of most of the 
 Popes, and the encouragement they give to sin by their indulgences, 
 jubilees, &c. 
 
 2. Does he sit in the temple of God as God, and exalt himself above 
 all that is called God 7 Witness the language of the Romish theolo- 
 gians; the priest does not know the confession of a penitent as man, 
 though he may know it as God ! Hear the blasphemous adulation of 
 the Pontiff's vassals, who accost him as Our Lord God the Pope ! 
 Look at the title, which the Head of the Romish Church claims as his 
 prerogative. His Holiness, the Pope ! But, says Dens, " the Pope 
 calls himself the servant of the sej*vants of God," hence he cannot be 
 the Antichrist of whom Paul speaks ! He calls himself the servant of 
 the servants of God, and permits others to accost him as their Lord 
 God ! He calls himself the servant &c., and yet claims to be above 
 all law ; exalts himself above all civil authority ; puts his foot upon 
 the neck of kings, and makes Emperors kiss his holy slipper ; pro- 
 fesses to hold the keys of heaven and hell, to have power to absolve 
 subjects from their oath of allegiance to their lawful rulers ; acts as 
 the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, and then with the utmost com- 
 placency plumes himself upon his vast humility in assuming a title, 
 which is belied by every official act which he performs ! In fact by 
 styling himself the servant of the servants of God, he verifies another 
 characteristic of Antichrist, who is to be known by " speaking lies in 
 hypocrisy r* 
 
 3. The antichristian apostasy is to be characterized by " giving h6ed 
 to doctrines of devils." The word rendered devils, here might have 
 been translated demori-gods ; it is the same word that is used in re- 
 peated instances in profane authors, to designate the spirits of departed 
 men, who were declared gods by an apotheosis not unlike the Pope's 
 canonization of saints ; and there can be no doubt, that the invocation 
 of the Romish saints, is the very abuse which is thus designated by 
 the Holy Spirit. 
 
 4. Antichrist shall forbid to marry. Who does not see the veri 
 fication of this prediction in the celibacy of the Romish priesthood 7 
 
 43 
 
510 CONGERNING ANTICHRIST. 
 
 If this be denied, show us the sect professing to be Christian, (for 
 remem-ber, it must be a departure from the faith, 1 Tim. iv. 1, not a 
 heresy, which originated like the Moslem delusion, entirely apart from 
 the Church;) which at all forbids marriage, except the Church of 
 Rome ! 
 
 5. Antichrist shall command to abstain from meats ; not to fast ; 
 but to abstain from meats ; see this verified to the very letter in the 
 discipline of the Romish apostasy, which permits men to eat any 
 thing but MEATS on a fast day ; according to Peter Dens on a day of 
 solemn ecclesiastical fast, the faithful may be two hours at the table, 
 before the guests are to be admonished to abstain from eating ; but 
 they may not eat meat under pain of mortal sin. 
 
 6. The coming of that wicked one " is after the working of Satan." 
 The chief attributes of Satan's character are falsehood and cruelty. 
 And has not the apostasy, whose head is the Pope, introduced false 
 doctrine, false worship, and a false religion into the Church, and thus 
 become the great murderer of souls ? Satan shows that he is a liar, 
 when he deludes souls into a false worship, and changes the truth of 
 God into a lie ; (Rom. i. 5.) ; and he has never done this more effectu- 
 ally, than in the establishment of the idolatrous worship of Rome. 
 The Church of Rome for centuries, has worn out the saints of the 
 Most High. The blood of sixty millions of «ouls, cries from earth to 
 heaven, against her. Her coming is truly after the working of Satan, 
 with all power, secular and spiritual ! 
 
 7. Antichrist is to come with " signs and lying wonders." Strange 
 that our theologian should assert that this cannot be substantiated of 
 the Popes, some of whom he asserts, have been distinguished by the 
 power of working real miracles, though many of the saints have 
 wrought greater. It is the boast of the Romish Church, that she still 
 retains the power of working miracles. Even in our own city, and 
 in the present year, legends have been published, corftaining reputed 
 miracles of St. Francis Xavier, St. Ignatius, &c., which in absurdity 
 are not to be surpassed by -any work of fiction or romance, that has ever 
 appeared in print; the adventures of Gulliver and Baron Munchausen, 
 are far more probable than the insane stories that are told about these 
 saints. Here is a specimen of the " lying wonders," which are actu- 
 ally detailed and retailed in this enlightened community. On one 
 occasion, St. Francis Xavier whilst at sea, leaning over the side of the 
 ship, lets a precious crucifix fall overboard. The saint, as n/ay well 
 be supposed, is overwhelmed with grief at the loss, and for a season is 
 almost disconsolate. In due time the saint is set ashore, and whilst 
 walking along the beach in company with some friends, they observe 
 
CONCERNING ANTICHRIST. 511 
 
 at a distance a crab moving towards them ; and as it approaches 
 nearer, something is discerned in its claws ; it proves to be the saint's 
 crucifix; the crab lays the crucifix at the saint's feet with the utmost 
 reverence, and then demurely walks back into the sea. A large vol- 
 ume of upwards of 400 pages, is filled with such stuff as this. Shall 
 we be asked here, where is the evidence that the Romish Church 
 deals in " lying wonders ?" 
 
 But the objection is ofiered, that antichrist shall reign but three 
 years and a half; whereas the Popes have filled the chair of St. Peter 
 for upwards of eighteen hundred years. This, by the way, is not true. 
 For it was in the year 606, that the bishop of Rome first claimed and 
 usurped universal supremacy. So that if Peter ever was bishop of 
 Rome, we cannot be said to include the apostle in the Romish apos- 
 tasy. The text in Daniel ch. vii., to which allusion is made, is some- 
 times referred to the tyrant Antiochus, who is considered as a type of 
 Antichrist; besides, the years are prophetical; hence each one of them 
 omtains 365 years, so that this is equivalent to the period of 42 months, 
 Rev. xi. 2., or a thousand two hundred and threescore, or 1260 days, 
 mentioned Rev. xii. 6, according to the key furnished in Ezek. iv. 6. 
 "I appoint thee each day for a year." This period of 1260 years, 
 added to the 606, when the title of Universal Bishop was assumed, 
 brings us to the year 1866, when we anticipate the overthrow of his 
 spiritual supremacy. For a masterly and succinct view of this sub- 
 ject, I refer my reader to Dr. Brownlee's Introduction to my lectures 
 on Romanism. The objection that antichrist will call himself Christ, 
 whereas the Pope calls himself Christ's vicar, is already answered. 
 One meaning of antichrist, is literally Christ's vicar ; just as am 
 ^aaiXevs means viceroy. 
 
 I bless God that I have been spared to finish this synopsis ; may 
 the Lord whom I desire to serve, use it to counteract in some 
 measure at least, the wiles and delusions of the Man of sin, and to his 
 great and holy name, shall be all the glory ! If Protestant ministers 
 find it of service to them in combating the errors of antichrist, I shall 
 be amply repaid for the labour which it has cost me. They are 
 required to testify against this apostasy ; for Paul after specifying the 
 characteristic marks which we have just reviewed, adds these words : 
 " If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shall 
 be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith 
 and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained." May the Lord, 
 by his grace, help us to do this in a spirit of love, and with a sincere 
 desire to save souls from death ! 
 
 THE END. 
 
 
 i^mm^' 
 
I 
 
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 This boox- -- ^OE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 FineJb£hfiduifiM^<^<^nts on iirst day o^'erdue iMMpit'?''^^ 
 
 PlCents on fourth day overdue '^ ' ' ' ~^tH 
 
 NOV 5 1947 
 
 MAR 1 S '.3CG 
 ■T3EC5 "BBjii.' 
 
 One dollar on seventh day overd 
 
 rdue. ^ 
 
 r • '^ "^ 1 
 ;^EC.CIR.AUG 2518 
 
 LD 21-100m-12,'46(A2012sl6)4120 
 
5^74 /r 
 
 y4 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY