i!!^;T!WilW^l:^:;:lK*iU:.^:::;;;..';;;:::^;i-^;^•v■. m «i^ itiii^ nmuui iHM< 1 f 1 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES PIRCELL, John Baptist, R. C. archbishop. Iin Mallow. County Cork. Ireland. 26 Feb., 1800 • ;ni Brown county, Ohio, 4 July. 1883. lie emi- [iteil to the United States in 'l818. and entered hbury college. Baltimore, where he taught. In 10 he was admitted to Mount St. Mary's. Em- ttsburg,^^ nd, after receiying minor orders, fin- ed his ■ . 'ological course in the Sulpitian col- e, Paris, ile was ordained a priest in the cathe- il of Notre Dame in 1826. and in 1827 was ap- nted professor of philosophy in St. MaiT's col- e, becoming president in 1828. The progress t this institution made during his presidency racted the notice of the Amei'ican hierarchy I he was nominated bishop of Cincinnati lie : consecrated on IS Oct., 1833. At the time of appomtment there was only one small frame uau Catholic church in the city, and not more n K; 111 the diocese, while the church property ■ yalued at about $12,000. He founded acade- iti(l schools, organized German congrega- •id built aconyent for the Ursulines. The Lil*er of Koman Catholics had increased from > JO to 70,000 in 1846, with 70 churches and 73 j In 1847 the diocese of Cleyeland was •ut of that of Cincinnati, and placed under i 1 -diet ion of another prelate at his request. ~ made an archbishop in 1850, with four II bishops attached to his see, and being ■• ni lxr,i, he received the pallium from the wn hands. He at once set about found- I it was to be one of the chief theological :es of the country, .^b,unt St. Mary's of the Me i.rcsidcd over his first provincial coun- ■^0.), and held a second in l8o8. It wa- "le to meet tlu; wants of the new congre- Hith the resources at hand, and this led tinancial embarra.ssments that shadowed Mg years of the archbishop's life. In 186S i'.ilion of new sees had limilcd his diocese lat |.art of Oliio south of latitude 40" 41' but 8tili contained nearly 140.000 Koman Ca'tho- IM iNOi* he att.'iided the Vatican council, ve in its deliberations, nn.l. although he -■1 the declaration of the infallibiiifv of the ,h<- at once subsf-ribed to the doctrine on its It ion. Ills golden jubilee was celebrated in \ V 1876 with great splendor. A crisis in his i ^mci,,k.s on whieh business slHuddlM.; vyien the crash came. K.hvard i'linvll d "'l^''" l..;ar . Itwasdiseoveredthat tl e n .•ss reaeiwd ,H,,rly ^-l.OOO.OO,,. T ie ,1 "ancialo,;erationstlmtledtoitNN si ■ "'\''''''l'''.'V'"'''<>^''"'HHH,,^htof..ha .n,. I b sl.op „, h disl,on..sty or evil in/eM^ Hi.V ol a bishop k„,,wn as the "cailir.lr ;""""'"■;. I" .^I.OOf. or .^.-i.OOO a y ., , .-"y-hvey..,.rs,. bishop b..for,i^ :,';..; I \<>ilecl on to a.rept any pari olil,,. .„,„ f;;;;''\*^.'«' '•''<• '''',rnirig|.,nd i.v U. ;. P"<';dw,h, he whole. His pn,.s-,s gav ' mm "• ''is golden jubii,.,.: ,|„. ,',„,, ,|,.a ,. ' """.•"A^'.'iianlabi.iMsliiMlions. He, b' vd ■ w >uil..ro I ,,, , ^^n,lh.Mlioeesethatli.originallv;:; lan lialfa million. (I,,. pri..sis nun, I,..,-,..! (Hi 1 ".:';;' drf- -^-'"-'-piMr.:,;-;;',;;^' ascwn .|,,\s discussion with Alexander C-im '"''•.•" «;np,,l,|ic|y defended (lini'ii,:' ;;;;■';';" onitor. Moh. discussio;,' ;' • ; md widely circiilatcl: i|,c latter as - The Ie igy and Free Thought " (1870). His her "♦"•ns were "J.cctures an.l Pastoral Jet 'Diocesan Sliiinf,.. \,., i t. '" ^i^\ A DEBATE *-- *^ ON THE ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION: HELD IN THE SYCAMORE-STREET MEETING HOUSE, CINCINNATI, FROM THE 13th TO THE 2181 OF JANUARY (SUN- DAYS EXCEPTED,) INCLUSIVE, 1837, BETWEEN ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, / OF BETHANY, VIRGINIA, AND THE RT. REV. JOHN B. PURCELL, BISHOP OF CINCINNATI. TAKEN DOWN BY REPORTERS, AND REVISED BY THE PARTIES. "Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits : for many false prophet* have gone out into the world." " If he will not hear the church, let him be to thee ns the heathen and the publican." — Je8C9 Christ. CINCINNATI: STEREOTYPED & PUBLISHED BY J. A. JAMES & Co. 1837. ■i. » ' ■ V. *^•^ V.*'- W Entered According to Act of Congress, in the year 1837f By J. A. JAMES AND CO., in the Clerk's Office for the District Court of Ohio. We the undersigned, having sold and conveyed to J. A. James and Co., of Cincinnati, for a certain sum per copy, (to be paid by them to us, or to our or- der, and to be appropriated to two public charitable institutions, as agreed on between ourselves,) for all that shall be printed; the exclusive right of printing and publishing the DEBATE on the ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION, held in the Sycamore Street Meeting House, Cincinnati, from the 13th to the 21st. of January 1837, inclusive, between ourselves, and taken down by Reporters, em- ployed by the said J. A. James & Co., and revised, corrected, and approved by U8. And we hereby assert that the edition or editions published by J. A. James & Co., or by their authority, and revised by us, must be considered the only cor- rect and authorized editions of said DEBATE. CiNCipnyATi, Feb. Ist. 1837. t JOHN B. PURCELL, Bp. Cin. A. CAMPBELL. I . ... .. >- < DC ft 8 TO THE PUBLIC. The Publishers being well aware of the importance of obtain- ing a full and correct report of this discussion, have spared no Of pains nor expense to effect this object. been obtained, this work, is now commended to an enquiring, u intelligent, and reading community. i THE PUBLISHERS. < Cincinnati, Fch. 1837. 4G14ai INTRODUCTION. To introduce the following report to the reader, we lay be- fore him the correspondence of the parties, which immediately- preceded the debate. LETTER FROM MR. CAMPBELL. Cincinnati, Jan. 11th, 1837. Bishop Purcell — Respected Sir: At two o'clock this morning, after a tedious and perilous journey of ten days, I safely arrived in this city. The river having become innaviga- ble in consequence of the ice, I was compelled to leave it and take to the woods, about two hundred miles above. By a zigzag course which car- ried me to Chillicothe and Columbus, sometimes on foot, sometimes on a sleigh, and finally by the mail stage, I accomplished a land tour of two hundred and forty miles, equal to the whole distance from Wheeling to Cincinnati. After this my travel's history, I proceed to state, that it was with pleas- ure I received cither from you or some of my friends, a copy of the Daily Gazette, on the 22d ult. intimating your fixed purpose of meeting me in a public discussion of my propositions, or of the points at issue between Ro- man Catholics and Protestants. This, together with your former declara- tions in favor of full and free discussion, is not only in good keeping with the spirit of the age, and the genius of our institutions, but fully indicative of a becoming confidence and sincerity in your own cause. This frank and manly course, permit me to add, greatly heightens my esteem for you. Now, sir, that I am on the premises, I take the earliest opportunity of informing you of my arrival, and of requesting you to name the time and place in which it may be most convenient for you to meet mc for the pur- pose of arranging the preliminaries. It has occurred to mc, that it would be useful and commendable to have an authentic copy of our discussion, signed by our own hands, and j)ul)lishcd with our consent ; and that it might have all the authority and credit which wc could give it, it would bo a2 ▼ VI INTHODUCTIOX. expedient to sell to some of the publishers in this city, the copyright, and let them employ a stenographer or stenographers to report faithfully the whole matter. It will also secure for such a work a more extensive reading, and conse- quently a wider range of usefulness, and I have no doubt, be most accep- table to our feelings, and every way reputable, to devote the profits, or the proceeds of the copyright, to some benevolent institution, on which we may both agree ; or in case of a difierence on a fitting institution, that we select each an object to which we can most conscientiously assign all the profits of such publication. In order to these ends, it will be necessary, that we timously arrange all the preliminaries, and as many persons are now in waiting, I trust it may be every way practicable, during the day, to come to a full understanding on the whole premises. ' Very respectfully, Your ob't. serv'c. ^ A. CAMPBELL. BISHOP PURCELL'S REPLY. CiNciKiTATi, 11th Januart, 1837. 3j&". Alexander Campbell — My Dear Sir : I sincerely sympathise with you on the tediousness and peril of your journey from Bethany to Cincinnati. This is truly a dreadful time to embark on our river, or to traverse our state. The sun's bright face I have not seen for several days ; I hope when the forth-coming discussion is once finished, our minds, like his orb, will be less dimmed by the clouds, and radiate the light and vital warmth without which this world would be a desert waste. If it meet your convenience, I shall be happy to meet you, at any time in the morning, or in the afternoon, at the Athenaeum. Your proposition respecting the sale of an authentic copy of the discus- sion to a publisher, and the proceeds, all expenses deducted, applied to the benefit of some charitable institution, or institutions, meets my hearty con- currence. And I propose that one half the avails of sale be given to the " Cincinnati Orphan Asylum," and the other half to the « St. Peter's fe- male Orphan Asylum," corner of Third and Plum streets, Cmcinnati. With best wishes for your eternal welfare, and that of all those who sin- cerely seek for the truth as it is in Christ Jesus, I remain Very respectfully yours, t JOHN B. PURGELL, Bishop of Cincinnati. INTRODTJCTION. Vll The parties met in the Athenaeum at 2 o'clock, P. M. of Jan. 11th., when after some debate on the question, Tflio shall be the respondent ? they finally agreed to the following RULES OF DISCUSSION. 1. We a^ee that the copy -right of the discussion shall be sold to some bookseller, who shall have it taken down by a stenographer, eind that all the avails of the copy-right shall be equally divided between two such public charities as Bishop Purcell and Mr. Campbell shall respectively designate. 2. That the discussion shall take place in the Sycamore-street meeting bouse ; and it shall continue seven days, exclusive of Sunday, commencing to-day, (Friday, 13th) froni half past 9 o'clock, A. M. to half past 12, and from 3 to 5 P. M., each day. 3. Mr. Campbell shall open the discussion each session, and Bishop Pur- cell respond. During the morning session the first speech of each shall not exceed an hour, nor the second half an hour. In the afternoon each speaker shall occupy only half an hour. 4. This discussion shall be under the direction of a board of five modera- tors ; of whom each party shall choose two, and these a fifth : any three of whom shall constitute a quorum. 6. The duties of the moderators shall be to preserve order in the assem- bly, and to keep the parties to the question. t JOHN B. PURCELL, A. CAMPBELL. In order to meet, as far as possible, the arrangements entered into for conducting the contemplated debate for seven days, Mr. Campbell, according to agreement, sent to bishop Purcell, on Thursday morning, Jan. 12, the following statement of the POINTS AT ISSUE. 1. The Roman Catholic Institution, sometimes called the 'Holy, Apos- tolic, Catholic, Church,' is not now, nor waa she ever, catholic, apostolic, or holy ; but is a nect in the fhir import of that word, older than any other sect now existing, not the ' Mother and Mistress of all Churches,' but an apostacy from the only true, holy, apostolic, and catholic church of Christ." 2. Her notion of apostolic succession is without any foundation in the Bible, in reason, or in fact ; an imposition of the most injurious consequences, built upon unscriptural iind anli-srri[)tural traditions, resting wholly upon the opinions of interested and fallible men. 3. She is not uniform in her faith, or united in her members ; but muta- ble and fallible, as any other sect of philosophy or religion — Jewish, Turk- Viii INTRODUCTION. ish, or Christian — a confederation of sects, under a politico-ecclesiastic head. 4. She is the " Babylon" of John, the « Man of Sin" of Paul, and the Em- pire of the " Youngest Horn" of Daniel's Sea Monster. 6. Her notions of purgatory, indulgences, auricular confession, remission of sins, transubstantiation, supererogation, &c., essential elements of her sys- tem, are immoral in their tendency, and injurious to the well-being of soci- ety, religious and political. 6. Notwithstanding her pretensions to have given us the Bible, and faith in it, we are perfectly independent of her for our knowledge of that book, and its evidences of a divine original. 7. The Roman Catholic religion, if infallible and unsusceptible of reforma- tion, as alleged, is essentially anti-American, being opposed to the genius of all free institutions, and positively subversive of them, opposing the general reading of the scriptures, and the diffusion of useful knowledge among the whole community, so essential to liberty and the permanency of good government, A. CAMPBELL. CiwciKiTATi, 12th January, 1837. DEBATE ON THE ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. REPORT. The parties met according to appointment, on the 13th January, 1837, at th« Sycamore Street Meeting House, at hall' past nine o'clock, A. M. MODERATORS. Messrs. Samuel Lewis, THo.-vrAs J. Biggs, William Disney, John Ro- gers AND J. W. Piatt. WILLIAM DISNEY, CHAIRMAN. Mr. Samuel Lewis, liavingcaJlerl the meeting to order, read the rules of th« Debate, as agreed upon between the parties, and the propositions advanced by Mr. Campbell for discussion. He requested the audience to refrain from any audible signs of anprobation or disajjprobalion, as it would interrupt the debate. Mr. Campbell ttien opened the debate as follows : — My Christian Friends and Fdlow-Ciiizens — I appear before you at this time, by the ffood providence of our Heavenly Father, in defence of the truth, and in explanation of the great redeemir.g, regenerating and ennobling principles of Protestant- ism, as opposed to the claims and pretensions of the Roman Catholic church. I come not here to advocate the particular tenets of any sect, but to defend the great cardinal principles of Protestantism. Considerable pains appear to have been taken by the gentleman who i.s my opponent on this occasion, to impress upon the minds of the public the idea that he stands here in the attitude of a defender of Catholicism, and fo represent me as its assailant. I am sorry to say that even some Protestants have contributed to give that color to this debate; for I saw in this morning's (Jazette an article, in which I am represented as conducting a crusade against the Roman Catho- lics. Its editor appears to have his sympathies morbidly enlisted in their cause. He is very sympathetic indeed, in bebnlf of the Roman Catholic religion. Every agony the mother cliurcli feels is a pang to him ; for every groan she heaves he has a bottle full of tears ready to be poured out. 1 will not stop to enquire whether they are politi- cal or religiotis tears. I have to do with the worthy gentleman here, who has represented me ;is having volunteered to come forward with an attar-k upon the Caihojic ciiurcb. I need scarcely inforrn that |)nrtinn of my audience, who were pre- sent at the last meeting erf the (College of Teachers in this city, that 60 far from its being true that I made an attack in the first instance, 2 9 10 DEBATK ON THE upon the Roman Catliolic church, the gentleman did first assail the Protestants. He says in the Gazette of the 19th of Dec. 1836, thatlamabold and wanton challenger; but a word of comment on this document will shew that it is quite the other waj'. The issue was made in the first instance in the College of Teach- ers. You will recollect that when Dr. J. I.. Wilson read an oration on the subject of universal education, the gentleman arose, and in that Protestant house, and before a Protestant assembly, directly and pos- itively protested against allowing the book which Protestants claim to contain their religion, to be used in schools. He uttered a tirade against the Protestant modes of teaching, and against the Protestant influence upon the community. This was the origin of the dispute. Had it not been for the assertions made by the gentleman on that oc- casion, we should not have heard one word of a discussion. It is true that the propositions just read may present me in the at- titude of what he is pleased to call an assailant of the Roman church. But the question is — how has the controversy originated 1 And let me ask, how is it possible for the gentleman to prove that, because, a year ago, I made some answer to an attack on Protestantism from the state of Illinois, and called for some more reputable antagonist, that on this account he did not assail Protestantism, and that I am the assailant in this case's Does my having been plaintiff' in that case make me necessarily plaintiff' in every other case 1 Does my having told him that I stood prepared to discuss the question at large with any creditable gentleman — [Here Mr. C. was interrupted by the moderators as not speaking to the point.] I submit to the decision of the moderators. I thought it due to myself, that the public should know precisely the attitude in which the gentleman and myself stand in this matter. I stand here as the defender of Protestantism, and not as the assailant of Catholicism. 1 wished to exonerate myself from such an imputation. But as the gentlemen have decided that we proceed at once to the question, let us begin and examine the first proposition. It is as follows : "Prop. I. The Roman Catholic Institution, sometimes called the 'Holy, Apostolic, Catholic, Church,' is not now, nor was she ever, catholic, apostolic, or holy ; but is a sect in the fair import of that word, older than any other sect now existing, not the ' Mother and Mistress of all Churches,' but an apostacy from the only true, holy, apostolic, and catholic church of Christ." As this is the place and time for logic rather than rhetoric, I will proceed to define the meaning of the important terms contained in this proposition. The subject is the Roman Catholic Institution. This institution, notwithstanding its large pretensions, I affirm, can be proved clearly to be a sect, in the true and proper import of the term. Though she call herself the mother and mistress of all churches, she is, strictly speaking, a sect, and no more than a sect. We now propose to adduce proof to sustain this part of the proposition. In the first place, the very term Roman Catholic indicates that she is a sect, and not the ancient, universal and apostolic church, the mo- ther and mistress of all churches. If she be the only universal or Catholic church, why prefix the epithet Roman ] A Roman Catholic church is a contradiction. The word Catholic means universal — the word Roman means something local and particular. What sense or ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. tl meaning is there in a particular universal church ? It is awkward on another account. If she pretends to be considered the only true and universal church of Christ among all nations and in all times, why call herself Roman] To say the Roman Catholic church of Ameri- ca, is just as absurd as to say the Philadelphia church of Cincinnati, — the London church of Pittsburgh, — the church of France of the United States. The very terms that she chooses indicates that she cannot be the universal church. It will not help the difficulty to call her the Church of Rome. These words indicate a sect and only a sect, as much as the words Roman Catholic. They signify strictly, only the particular congregations meeting in that place. The Roman Catholic historians endeavor to reconcile this discre- pancy of terms by saying that, though those particular congregations are meant, in their larger sense the terms are used to designate all those congregations, scattered throughout the world, who are in com- munion with the church of Rome. Thus testifies Du Pin — " It is true, that at tlie present time, the name of the church of Rome, is giv- en to the Catliolic church, and that these two terms pass for sjnon} nious. "But in antiquity no more was intended by the name of the church of Rome, than the church of the city of Rome, and the popes (bishops) in their subscrip- tions or superscriptions, look simply to the quality of bishops of Rome. The Greek scbisiuatics seem to be the fii-st wlio gave the name of the church of Rome to all the churches of the west, whence the Latins made use of this to dis- tiag^iish the churches which communicated with the church of Rome, from the Greeki who were separated from her communion. From this came the rustoni to g^ivc the name of the church of Rome to the Catholic church. But the other churches did not from this lose their name or tlieir authority." I shall hereafter ^ive the day and date of this separation, when she received this sectarian designation and became a sect, in the proper acceptation of that term. It may, perhaps, appear that it was not only unscriptural, but dishonorable ; as opprobrious as ever were the terms Lutheran or Protestant. But suppose we call her " Catholic" alone; and her advocates now endeavor to impress the idea that she is no longer to be called " Ro- man Catholic," but Catholic, tliis term ecjually proves her a sect; for in the New Testament and primitive antiquity there is no such de- signation. It is simply the church of Christ. It is one thing for us to choose a name for ourselves, aiul another to have one chosen for us by our enemies. Societies, like persons, are passive in receiving their names. It is with churches as it is with individuals; they may not wear the name they prefer. She wishes now to be called no lon- ger Roman Catholic, but (Catholic. Slie repudiates the appellation of Roman; and claims to be the only Catholic church tliat ever was, and is, and ever more shall be. But we cannot allow her to assume it; and we dare not, in truth, bestow it, for she is not catholic. But, as there is no church known in thc! New Testament by tliat nam(>, could we 80 designate her, still she would t)e a sect. But let me ask, what is the church of Rome of the nineteenth cen- tury, or rather, what is the present Roman (Catholic institution 1 Permit me here to say, most emphatically, that I have not the slight- est disposition to use terms of opprobrium in speaking of this church ; or of the worthy gentleman who is opposed to me in this debute. I do not wish or int<;tid to use the slightest expression which could be construed into an unfriendly tone of Batirc, irony or invective toward-! 12 DEBATE ON THE the respectable gentleman, or towards }ii3 cliurch. I shall speak freely of her pretensions to be the only true church, &c. but I shall observe a scrupulous respect in all my languatre towards the presen representatives of the Catholic church in tlie nineteenth century. Are we tiicn to understand her as the immutable, universal, ancient, primitive, apostolic church of Christ? Arc we to understand this by the Roman Catholic church of the nineteenth century, with her popes, her cardinals, her patriarchs, primates, metropolitans, arciibishops, archdeacons, monks, friars, nuns, &c. &c. teacliing and preaching the use and worshij) of images, relics, ])enances, invocation of departed men and women, veneration for some being whom tliey call " the mo- ther of God," teaching and preaching the doctrine of priestly absolu- tion, auricular confession, purgatory, transubstantiation, extreme unc- tion, &c. &c. Is this the ancient, universal, holy apostolic church? Not one of these dogmas can be found jn the bible. They originated hundreds of years since, as I am prepared to show, from the evidence of Roman Catholic authors themselves. How then can w-e call it the ancient apostolic church 1 Not one of these offices nor dogmas is mentioned in the New Testament. Hear Du Pin on this point. In exposing the im|)osition, practised, by an effort, so late as the ninth century, to foist into the history of the church certain pretended decrees or writings of those called the first popes, Du Pin, an authentic Roman Catholic historian, proves these decrees and writings to be spurious, because in them there are numerous allusions to offices and customs not yet existing in the times referred to. " The toUuwing proves llieiu spurious. Ibt. The. si roiid epistle of St. Clement directed to St. Jaiuts, S))eaks of the Os'.inrii or (.loorkeeptr?, archdeacons and other ecclesiastical officers, th:;t were not then introduced into the church." 2nd. " This lettt-r mentions sii6-deacon3, an order not then established in the church." p. 534. 3d. " In the first Epistle attributed to St. Sixtus, he is called an ' archbishop,' a word not used in this time." 4th. "The SeconJ, attributed to the same pope, mentions consecrated vessels, and appeals to Royne, the grandeur of the church. It is there pretended that all bishops wait for the pope's decision, and are instructed by his letters ; modes of speaking- never used by the first bishops of Rome." 5th. " The epistle attributed to Telesphorus calls him an archbishop, a name unknown in the first ages." 6th. " There is a decree in it, to enjoin three masses on our Savior's nativity, a custom not so ancient." 7th. " We find several passa<^e9 in the letter ntfrlbuted to JlniccUis, which does not agree with the time of that po])e ; as, for instance, what is there laid down concerning the ordinations of bishops, sacerdotal tonsure, arcMiishops and primates, which were not instituted till long after ; besides many things of the same ii.it-re." p. 535. How, then, can we suppose that this chufch of the nineteenth cen- tury, with so many appendages, is the apostolic church — the only original, primitive, universal institution of Christ? But she glories in the name of mother and mistress of all churches throughout the world. This astonishes me still more ; for with the bible in his hand and history before him, who can stand up and say, that this church ever was the mother and mistress of all churches The most ancient catholic church was the Hebrew. She was the mother, though not the mistress of all churches; for the christian church has no reigning queen on earth, to lord it over her — as Paul says, on another occasion — " Jerusalem is the mother of us all." KO.MAX CATHOLIC RELIGION. 13 If the gentleman admit Luke to be a faithful historian, he must not only place the Hebrew church first, but the Samaritan, Phenician, Syrian and Hellenist churches as older than the church in Rome. I say if we speak of churches, as respects antiquity, the Hebrew, Sa- maritan, Syrian and Phenician churches must be regarded as prior to her. The Acts of the Apostles close with Paul's first appearance in Rome. But that the Roman Catholic institution may stand before you in bold relief as a sectarian establishment, I will give you a definition of her pretensions, from an authentic source, one of her own stan- dards. The Douay catechism, in answer to the question — " What are the essential parts of the church T' teaches " A pope, or supreme head, bishops, pastors and laity." p. 20. These, then, are the four constituent and essential elements of the Roman Catholic church. The first is the pope, or head. It will be confessed by all, that, of these, the most essential is the head. But should we take away any one of these, she loses her identity, and ceases to be what she assumes. My first etfort then shall be to prove that, for hundreds of years after Christ, she was without such a head ; the most indispensable of these elements ; and consequently, this be- ing essential to her existence, she was not from the beginning. Be- cause no body can exist before its head. Now, if we can find a time whpn there was no pope, or supreme head, we find a time when there was no Roman Catholic party. By referring to the scriptures, and to the early ecclesiastical re- cords, we can easily settle tliis point. Lot us begin with the New Testament, which all agree, is the only authenticated standard of faith and manners — the only inspired record of the christian doctrine. This is a cardinal point, and I am thankful that in this we all agree. Wiiat is not found there, wants the evident sanction of inspiration, and can never conmiand the respect and homage of those who seek for divine authority in faith and morality. I affirm then, that not one of the offices, I have enumerated, as be- longing to the Roman Catholic church, was known in the days of the apostles, or is found in llu: N<;\v Ttural. The version from which I am about to quote wasprinli'd in New York, and is cer- tified to correspond exactly, with the Rliemisli oriirjuai, l)y a number of gentlemen, of the first standing in society. If it difiers from any other and more authentic copy, I will not rely upon it. I am willing to take whatever l)iblo the gentleman may {)ro|)ose. I read from the twenti(!th of Matthew. ".lesus said to his disciples. You know that the princes of the (Jentiles overrule them, and those that an; the grea- ter exercise power against them. It shall not be so among you, but whosoever will be the greater among yon, let him be your minister!" Does this convey the idea of a prince; among the apostles, a vicar of (Jhrist, a lord over the people of (iod 1 l)r)es it not rather say there shall not be any /wf/.t/(//> ainnn^nl yon! 'I'iiis command is express, ■hat there shall not be a pope, a supreme lord of the christian church. Again, Malt. 23. 8. " Be not you called Rabbi, for one is your Master B 14 DEBATE oy THE and all ye are brethren : and call none father (i. e. pope) for one is your father, be that is in heaven. Neither be you called masters, for one is your master, (^hrist. He that is the greater of you shall be your servitor!" If the very q\iestion al)out a pope had been before the Messiah at this time, he could not have spoken more clearly. This expression indicates the most perfect equality of rank among the apostles and disciples of Christ, and positively forbids, in a re- ligious sense, the assumption of the title o{ father ot pope. The com mandment which says " thou shalt not steal," is not more clearly laid down than the command " call no man father." Now will the gentleman deny that *' pope" (in Greek " pappas," in Latin, "papa") means "father?" and that the case clearly comes within the command. Jesus Christ says, "call no man pope ;" yet they ordain a bishop and call him pope ; and this pope claims the title of "universal father" — supreme head and governor of the church of Christ. He is sometimes called Lord God the pope. This testimony of Christ will outweigh volumes. Put all the fo- lios and authorities, which the gentleman may bring, on one side, and this text of .Tesus Christ on the other, and the former, in comparison will be found light as the chaft" which is blown away by a breath. Can any one, then, who fears God and believes in the Messiah, call the pope, or any human being " father" in the sense here intended. The Lord anticipated the future in all his precepts, and spoke with an eye to it as well as to the men of his own time. He had the pride and assumptions, of the Rabbis of Jerusalem, in his e)'e, who cove- ted renown, who loved such greetings in the market place, and re- ceived such compellations in the synagogues. Describing these men to his disciples, he cautions them against their example, and teaches them to regard each other as brethren. I hope the gentleman will pay particular attention to this point in his reply to these remarks. The third testimony on which we rely will be found in Ephesians iv. 11. This passage sums up all the officers or gifts which Jesus gave the church after his ascension into heaven. " And " says Paul " he gave some apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some pastors, and doctors " or teachers. In this enumeration, which contains the whole, there is no pope. The highest or first rank is given to apostles. In every other enumeration found in the epistles, there is the same clear reference to the apostles as thefirst class. 1 Cor. xii. 28. But let Peter himself speak as to his rank. We see that in his own 1st Epistle, ch. 1, he calls himself an apostle, not the apostle of Jesus, not the prince of apostles, not the supreme head of the church. Pe- ter had no idea of such headship and lordship. Again in addressing the "seniors" or elders, chap. v. 1. he says, "I myself am a fellow senior." They were all co-elders, co-bishops, co-apostles, as respected each other ; and as respected all other offi- cers the apostles werejirsl. The thought of a supreme head amongst them is not found in the New Testament; only as reprobated by our Savior. I will not, at present, advance any more scriptural authority upon the point, but shall proceed to examine what foundation this element of the Roman church, has in ancient history. But I would here say distinctly, once for all, that I will not open a single document to prove any doctrine, tenet, or principle of Protestantism, other than this holy ROMAN" CATHOLIC RELIGION. 15 record of the prophets, and apostles, the holy men of God, who spake as they were moved hy the Holy Spirit. On these I rely, and I af- firm that these contain no authority for the assumption of the doctrine of a universal father, pope, or head of the church. There was no such person mentioned — no such idea cherished until hundreds of years after the death of the apostles. I will read the following' general remarks by this learned historian. The title page is as follows : — A New History of Ecclesiastical Writers, containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testaments ; of the lives and writings of the primitive Fathers : an abridgment and catalogue of their works ; their various editions, and censures, deter- mining the genuine and spurious. Together with a judgment upon style and doctrine. Also a compendious history of the Councils ; with Chronological Tables of the whole, written in French by Lewis El- lies Du Pin, doctor of the Sorbonne, and Regius Professor at Paris 3 vols. Folio. The Third Edition corrected, Dublin, printed by and for George Grierson, at the l^ivo Bibles in Essex Street, mdccxxiv. I am happy to find, appended to the preface, the seals and signatures of- men high in the church, which I cannot now stop to read. From this work I will proceed to read some passages in proof of the proposition I have advanced, that there is not a vestige of evi dence in favor of the cardinal idea, of the Roman Catholic religion, that tliere wjus a pope in the first ages of the church. At the close of the third century the highest advance yet made towards any supremacy in the church on the ground of metropolitan standing, is thus describ ed by Du Pin. '• 'I'lie bisliops of;^r(-at cities had thiir prorogatives in ordinations, and in coun- cils; and as in civiJ afl'airs men generally nad recourse to the civil metropolis, so likewise in ecclesiastical matters, they consulted with the bishop of the metro- politan city. The churches of the three principal cities of the world were looked upon as criief, and their bishops attributed great prerogatives to themselves. The church of Rome, founded by St. Peter and St. I'aul, was considered as first, and its bishop as first amongst all the bishops of the world ; yet they diil not be- lieve him to be infallible: and ihougli they frequently consuld-d him, and hit advice wag of great rousefmrnce, yet they did not receive it blind-fold and im- plicitly, every bIslio[) imaguiing himself to have a right to judge in ecclesiastical matters." p. 590. Observe the bishops of the principal cities attributed to t/iemselvea grcftt prerogatives. And Rome, the chief city, began to assume the chief prerogatives. Rut tlie general character of the clergy as detail- ed by thi.s writer was not yet favorable to such assumptions — for, says he, " The clergy were not distinguished from others by any peculiar habits, but by the sanctity of their life unti manners, they .were removed from all kind of avariri', and carefully avoiiled <;very thing that seemed to carry tin: appearance of scandalous, fdthy lucre. They administered the sacniment g-rn/i*, and believed 5t to be an abominable crime (ogive or re reive any thing for a spiritual bli'ssing. Tithes were not then ajjpropriated to them, but the people maintained them vol- tinturily at their own expense." "The clergy were prolijliited to meddle with any civil and secular affairs. They were ordained againiit their will and did not remove from one church to another out of a principle of interest or ambition. They were extremely chaste and re- gular. It was lawful for priests to keep the wives they married before they were ordained." Nothing indeed like an ecclesiastical establishment was yet in ex- istence : for says Du Pin, speaking of these times. " .\ Iter all. it must be confessed, thatth" discipline of the church lias beeu so 16 bEBATE ON THE extremely different and so often altered, that it is almost impossible to say anj thins: positively concerning it." p. 590. So Stood the matter at the close of the third century. But we have still more definite and positive testimony, in the great councils of the 4th and 5th centuries. Let us then examine the early councils. The famous council of Nice which sat in 325, is the firs't general council that ever assembled ; for although they call the con- sultations of the apostles — Acts 15,, a council, yet in the enumeration of general councils, of which they establish eighteen, that of Nice is called the first. At this council there were present 318 bishops. It was called by the Roman emperor in order to settle certain discords in what was then called the church. By the sixth canon of this first council it ap- pears, according to Du Pin, that the idea of a pope, or supreme head, had not begun to be entertained^ The sixth canon of the council of Nice is as follows. "The 6th canon is famous for the several questions it has occasioned. The most natural sense that can be given to it, is this: ' We ordain tliat the ancient custom shall be observed, whicli gives power to the bishop ol" Alexandria, over all the provinces o( Egypt, Libya, and Pnnlapolis, because the bishop of Rome has the like jurisdiction over all the suburbicary regions (for this adclition must be supplied out of Riijinus;) we would likewise have the rights and privileges of the church of Aniioch and the other churches preserved ; but these rights ought not to prejudice those of the metropolitans. If any one is ordained without the consent of the metropolitan, the council declares, that he is no bishop: but if any one is canonically chosen by the suffrage of almost all the bishops of tne province, and if there are but one cr two of a contrary opinion, the suffrages of the far greater number ought to carry it for the ordination of those particular persons. This canon being thus explained has no difficulty in it. It does not oppose the primacy of the church of Rome, but neither does it establish it.' " In this sense it is, that it compares the church of Rome to the church of Alexandria, by considering them all as patriarchal churches. It continues also to the church of Aniioch and all the other great churches, whatsoever rights they could have; but lest their authority should be prejudicial to the ordinary metropolitans, who were subject to their jurisdiction, tlie council confirms what had been ordained in the fourth canon concerning the authority of metropo- litans in the ordination of bishops. This explication is easy and natural, and we have given many proofs of it in our Latin dissertation concerning the ancient discipline of the church." "This canon," says Du Pin, who be it remembered was always anxious to find some authority for the pope's supremacy, " does not ESTABLISH THE SUPRE.MACY OF THE CHURCH OF RoME." Willing 33 he was to have this primacy traced to the beginning of Christianity, he is constrained to admit, that even the council of Nice does not es- tablish it. Nay more — it is in truth against it ; for it gives the Bishop of Alexandria like jurisdiction with the church of Rome; and also preserves to the church of Antioch its metropolitan dominion. It would be too tedious to go into an exposition of the causes, why so much power was accumulated in the hands of four or five bishops. It originated in the divisions of the empire. In Roman jurisdiction, there were four great political dioceses, (for diocese was then a politi- cal term) and to these the church conformed. Hence the patriarchal sees of Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, and Alexandria. In process of time, Jerusalem was added, and these all became radiating centres of ecclesiastical power and patronage. The bishop of each diocese assumed a sort of primacy, in his own district ; and as various inter- ferences and rivalries in jurisdiction occurred, the council of Nice so far decided that the same power should be given to them all — that all R05IAN CATHOLIC EELIGIOX. 17 primates should be co-ordinate. Hence Du Pin could not find in that council authority for the supreme primacy of Rome. In the canons of the second and third general councils there is no reference to these matters whatever. I shall therefore proceed to the great council of Chalcedon, of pre- eminent authority, the greatest of the first four general councils. From all the canons of the council relating to government, it is evi- dent that they had not yet excogitated the idea of a supreme head. Says Du Pin, " lhe-2i>th canon grantstD the church of tliecity of Cons'.antincph,\vh\ch is called JVtto Rome, the same privileges with old Rome, because this city is the se- cond city in the world. It also adjudges to it, besides this, jurisdiction over the dioceses of Ponius, Asia, and T/irace, and over the churches which are out of the bounds of the emperor, and aright to ordain metropolitans in the provinces of these dioceses." p. 678. Thus this council, composed of 340 bishops, and assembling in the year of our Lord 451, gave the same power to the patriarch of Con- stantinople as to the patriarch of Rome, and makes the supremacy of the one equal to the supremacy of the other. I have examined the proceedings of all the councils of the first six centuries, of which I find about 170, promulgating in all about 1400 canons. I have read and examined the twenty creeds of the fourth century with all their emendations down to the close of the sixth; and I affirm, without the fear of contradiction, that there is not in all these a single vestige of the existence of a pope or universal head of the church down to the time of Gregory the great, or John the Faster of Constantinople. I shall now proceed to show from the same learned historian when this idea began to be divulged. And be it emphatically observed that the title of pope in its peculiar and exclusive sense was first assumed by the patriarch of Constantinople, and approved by the patriarch of Rome. Du Pin says in his life of Gregory, chap. 1, "He did of- ten rigorously oppose the title of universal patriarch, which the patri- archs of Constantinople assumed to themselves." Indeed he calls the title, " proud, blasphemous, anti-christian, diabolical," and says, the bishops of Rome refused to take this title upon them " lest they should seem to encroach upon the rights of other bishops." But the following document or remonstrance against the title shews what a novelty the idea of an universal head, father, or pope was even at Rome, A. D. 588 :— " St. Gregory does not only oppose this title in the patriarch of Consfantino- le, but maintains also, that it cannot agree to any other bishop, and that the iishop of Rome neither ought, nor can assume it. ,Tohn the younger, patriarch of Constantinople , had taken upon him this title in a council held in 586, in the time of pope relagius, which obliged this pope to annul the Acts of this coun- cil. St. Gregory wrote of it also to this patriarch ; hut this made no impression on him, and Jiilin would not abandon this fine title, H. 4. Kp. 36. St. Gregory addreised himself to the eiii|)iTor Mauritius, and exhorted him earnestly to employ his authority for redressing this abuse, and force him who assumed this title to quit it. He remonstrates to him in his l> tter, that although Jeaus Christ had committed to St. Peter the care of all his churches, yet he was not called universal apostle. That the title of universal bishop is against the rules of the ospel, iiiid the nppoifitineiil of the canons : that there cannot be nn universal ishop but the authority of all the other will be destroyed or diminished ; that if the bishop of Constantinople were universal bishop, and it should happen that oe should fall into heresy, it might be said that the universal church was fallen into destruction. That the council of Chalctdon bad offered this title to Lto, B3 3 ^ I 18 DBBATB Oy THB bat neither he nor his luccessors would fircrpt it, lest by giving something pe- culiar to one bishop only, they should laki- away the rights which belong to all the bishops. — That it btlongs to the eniprror to reduce by his authority hira who drspists the canons, and does injury to tlie universal ciiurch by assunning this sinp;ular name." H. 4. I'.p. ;?2. But at this time the patriarchs" of Constantinople and Rome were contending for the supremacy, and while it appeared to Gregory that his rival of the east was likely to possess the title, he saw in it, eve- ry thing anti-christian and profane. When a new dynasty, however, ascended the throne and offered the title to a Roman bishop, it lost all its blasphemy and impiety, and Me find the successor of Gregory can wear the title of uiuversal patriarch when tendered him by Phocas, without the least scrupulosity. It is then a fact worthy of much consideration in this discussion, that John bishop of Constantinople first assumed the title of univer- sal head of the whole christian church, and that the bishop of Rome did in that case oppose it as anti-scriptural and anti-christian. Concerning the reputation of Saint Gregory I need not be profuse. Of the Gregories he is deservedly called the Great. Renowned in history as one wlio stamped his OAvn image on the Roman w-orld for a period of five hundred years, yet he could net brook the idea of a pope, especially when about to be bestowed on his rival at Constan- tinople. St. Gregory, be it remembered, says Du Pin, did not only oppose the title in the case of John the Faster, as proud, heretical, blasphe- mous, &c. but could not agree to its being assumi.;d by any other bishop ; he affirmed that the bishops of Rome ought not, dare not, cannot assume this pompous and arrogant title. Thus stood matters as respects a supreme head up to within 14 jeais of the close of the Cth century. — [Time expired.] Eleven unlock ^. M. Bishop Purcei.l rises — I thought it likely, my respected and beloved fellow citizens, that I should have to day a ditlicult task before me. But I perceive that I shall have an easy one. I expected from the reputation of my antag- onist as a debater, that he was going to argue so closely, and to press me so hard, that he would, to use a common expression, make minced meat cf me, and not leave one bone of me unbroken. I thought that my creed, so ancient, so venerable, so holy, was to be torn into tat- ters and scattered to the four winds of heaven — I was mistaken ! The gentleman occupied ten minutes of his time in endeavoring to bias the judgment of his hearers in favor of the idea, that this contro- versy originated not with himself, but that I was the aggressor, in doing which he was called to order. I will not trespass more than two or three minutes on your patience in answering his preliminary observations. I am willing to let that matter rest on its own merits. As to the question of assailant and defender in this controversy, the public have the data, and it is for them to judge. My worthy opponent began the presen-t debate by representing himself as the staunch defender of Pro- testantism, endeavoring thereby to enlist the sympathies of Protestants in his favor. And what, I would presume, to inquire, are his princi- ples 1 What are his claims, his pretensions, or his right to appear Ufore this Msambly aa ths ilefender of Protestantism ^ We are all EOilAK CATHOLIC RELIGION. 19 aware whit sad pranks have been lately played off before high Hea ven by men sty'/ln^ themselves Protestants, which all classes of Pro- testants unite in deprecating, .which they all condemn. I know not whether there be not some Protestants here, \vho will not admit his gratuitous advocacy of their principles — who will not believe that the firinciples of Piolestantism which he volunteers to defend will be ful- y or fairly represented by him. For one, I think tiie Episcopalians, a numerous and respectable class, will not consent to be represented by him ; for he denies, if I am rio^htly informed, that there is proper- ly any ministry in the Protestant church so called — that a divine call should precede the assumption of the sacred office. [Here the mod- erators interrupted, by requesting the speaker to confine himself to the question.] Well we are so far even, [a lauQjh.] The gentleman, then, began by the assertion that the term Roman Catholic was an incongruity.— But I deny it to be an incongruity. Terms, we all know, are used the mo-e clearly to designate the idea or object which they represent. " Catholic" is the name of our church ; and we qnly prefix the word Roman to signify that she is in communion with the see of Rome. We acknowledge there a primate of superior, ecclesiastical jurisdic- tion, and in his communion we do abide. He says the word Roman is incongruous ; yet his own authority, Du Pin, says it was S3'nonymous with Catholic. It was so under- Stood formerly. And here I may observe that I deny the authority of Du Pin to be competent to the settlement of questions to be called up for decision in the course of the present controversy. Du Pin was a Jansenist, removed from his place of Regius Professor at the Sor- bonne for his doctrinal errors, by Louis XIV^. to whom Clement XI. addressed a brief on this occasion, commending his zeal for the truth. The claim of Rome was undisputed in the early ages, and it was only when her preeminence was contested that the term " Roman" was used before the word Catholic. Hence it was no incongruity, but a clearer designation of the see in whose communion were all the churches. He has stated an inaccuracy in saying that tiie word cath- olic was not found in the bible. Is not the epistle of St. James cal- led catholic T And will he presume to say the word was not placed there in the very first age of Christianity? The gentleman says he will use no words that may convey an op- frobrious meaning. God forbid that I should set him the example, shall debate this question with earnestness, but not with passion. As soon as the discussion closes, I can meet the gentleman without a ■ingle unkind or unfriendly feeling. But in enumerating various doctrines of the Catholic church, I was shocked to hear him use the language " some being called the mother of God." Great God ! didst tliou not send into the world thy !Son, Jesus Christ, to save perishing man. and didst iliou not select one of all the daiighters of Kve.to be the mother of that child of benedic- tion, and was not Mary this holy one, to whose care was committed his infinry, nnd to whom he was subject] VV'as sh»! not the chosen one of heaven, to whom its archangel was sent with the communica- tion — " Hail, full of Grace," or as it is in the Protestant version— "thou that art liigbly favored — the I,ord is with thee," and do we now hear her stigmatized in such language, and dcsignatad aa "soiua being called the mother of God 1" 20 DEBATE ON THE The gentleman then contests the doctrine of a hierarchy in the chvirch ; and says what he asserts is proved by the scriptures. I would ask — has he read the bible ? Has he read the book of Leviti- cus T Docs he not find there the example set of a distinction of orders iu religious aflfairs ] Did not the Lord speak to Moses, saying, — " ' Take Aaron with his sons, their vestments and the oil of unction,' and he poured it on Aaron's head — he put also the mitre on his head And after he had offered his sons, he vested them with linen tunics and girded them with girdles," &c. &c. " And Nadab and Abiu were consumed with fire for opposing them, and they died before the Lord." Did not Moses lead ] Did not Aaron assist? Were there not councillors appointed by the Lord, to divide the burden of their ministry'? Did not king Josaphat send Zachariah and Nathaniel and Michael, and with them the Levites, Senneias, &c., to teach the peo- ple ■? Paralip. 17. 7. What is this but a distinction of orders and of authority in the Jewish dispensation ] He says there was no distinction of orders in the early christian church ; and he refuted himself by appealing for a solution of the dif- ficulty to St. Paul. Were there no orders, no hierarchy"? What says St. Paul in 4th Kphesians? " And he gave some apostles, and some prophets, ann aher some evangelists, and other some pastors, and teachers, for trie perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ; until we all meet unto the unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ." We must here remark a gradation of authority in the church of God. For what] For the work of the ministry. There never has existed a so- cial body without subordination, or distinction of rank. The church of Christ is a social body. It needs to be subjected to order, even more than a political body; and as if St. Paul anticipated the objec- tion, which we have, not without surprise, heard this day urged, he expressly states the object of the institution of a hierarchy by him, who ascending on high gave gifts to men, to be the perfecting of the saints — the unity of faith. " Are all," he asks, (what my friend would make them) "prophets? Are all pastors?" — He elsewhere asks, " How can they preach unless they be sent?" By whom? By an ecclesiastical superior. — So much for the evidence of the Old Tes- tament, and the New Testament. They both teach a head, a hierar- chy and subordination among the people of God. This takes me to the examination of the title, assumed by the Cath- olic church, of mother and mistress of all the churches. He says Jerusalem was the mother church at first — and then the Samaritan, and so on, 1 need not follow him. I will explain what we mean by the term. — We call her mother because she guides, she cherishes us. We call her mother, because we feel a filial reverence for her — just as an orphan calls her who protects her, educates her, and guides her ■wandering feet, by the same tender appellative. There is no blasphe- my in this comparison. It is the Son of God that established the authority of that church. The name is its designation. But the word ' mistress' is never used in speaking of the church, in the sense of lordship, or queenship. It is the way in which chil- dren address their teacher. They frequently use the expression, as we read in (;ordery'9 Colloquies, "salve magister." Magistra here is addressed to her in her capacity of teacher, and such she is, and, as I EOMAX CATHOLIC EKLIGIO:?. 81 shall prove, by the appointment and the express institution of Jesus Christ. He next referred to tr«<- P oway catechism to show from the defini- tion of the Catholic church, that she consisted of four elements, viz. the pope, bishops, pastors, and laity. Now the catechism of this diocese defines the Catholic church to be the congregation of all the faithful, professing- the same faith, re- ceiving the same sacraments, and united under one visible head, the pope, or vicar of Jesus Christ, on earth. It is defined to be the congregation of all the faiihful. This is the definition which most authors give. It is that of the catechism from which my friend has quoted. But let us adopt his definition, and I am prepared to show that the idea of a supreme head has its origin in the bible, and is supported by the earliest ecclesiastical authoritj*, I must here take notice of the promise he gave to put his finger on the precise day and date when the church called the Roman Catholic church, ceased to be the church of Christ. He has left us as much ia the dark as ever on this most important of all events. It is a point which has puzzled the world, and will for ever puzzle it, to fix that date. It will, I am sure, puz- zle my friend. The whole world has never been able to state at what particular moment the Catholic church lost her prerogative and the favor of God — when she ceased to be in the true sense the Calhoh'c Church. The reason of Ihis is obvious. She has never forfeited her prerogative. But to the matter before us. It is opposed to scripture to assert that the church in apostolic days had no head. What did Christ say to Peter when he addressed him the mysterious question — " Lovest thou me more than these"? Peter says he does love him. Jesus gives him the order, " feed my lambs." A second time he asks the question, and receives the same reply. The third time he repeats the same question. Peter, troubled that his Lord should doubt his affection, replies, " Oh Lord, thou knowest all things — thou knowest that I love thee," and Jesus repeated the command — " feed iiiy lambs" — " feed my shee))." Thus Christ establishes the headship of the church in Peter, and him he makes liis vice-gerent, or common pastor, to feed both lambs and sheep — botli clergy and laity. Mr. Campbell quarrels with the doctrine of the pope's headship because it carries 71 poivcr and an auihorily with it: aiul he quotes the New Testament to prove no such power to have been exercised in tlio days of the apostles. I have disproved his argument upon this point already. Christ did institute a body of leaders, a ministry to guide his people, "that henceforth we be no more children tossed to and fro, and carried about hy every wind of doctrine, by the wickechiess of men, by cunning craftiness, by which they lie in wait to deceive. But doing the truth in Christ, we may in all things grow up in him who is head, even Christ; from whom the wiiole body being compac- ted and fitly joined together, by what every part su|)plielh, according to the f)p(Talir)fi in the measure of every pari, makelli increase of tlio body, unto the edifying of itself in ciuirity.'' Must not the body have a head, the house a foundation'? Ho objects that we call the sovereign pontiff — Pope, or father, whereas Clirisl says, "call not any man Father." But is this proliibilion of our Savior to be taken liter- ally ] Is there any guilt or imoiety in calling a parent " Father?" 83 DEBATE OX THE Many of Christ's commands are similar. He commands., ilp'' to call no man good.- for God only is good. But do we not, in saluting a friend in common life, say " Good Sir," " myp^ood friend]" &c. Is there any impiety in this 1 It is the usinjr these terms in that sense in which lliey are peculiar to tiie divinity, which Christ forbids. 'And the pope when he corresponds with the bishops, does not_^ assume these proud titles, but addresses them as an elder Brother. We do not call him " Lord God the Pope." Mr. C. says, St. Paul did not lord it over the clergy. P^either does the pope. He is to govern the church according to the canons. He can make no articles of faith. He cannot, he does not act arbi- trarily in proposing articles of belief unknown to Catholic antiquity. But neither will he suffer innovation. His language is lik'e St. Paul's, "Were I or an angel from Heaven to preach to you any other gospel, than what has been preached, let him he Anathema!" This expres- sed the sense the great apostle entertained of his own responsibility, and the danger of novelty in religion. He would not suffer altar to be raised against altar, on the ground of private interpretation of the bible. He would not suffer the wolves of heresy and error to prowl around the fold, and tear, and scatter the sheep entrusted to him by Jesus Christ. It would be horrid blasphemy to apply to man the title Father, in the sense in which it is addressed to God. We never call the rijS^e in any sense God. When the pope writes to the bishoY)S, he begms hy '■'■ Dikcti Fratres''' "Beloved Brethren," — a fepublican, and if you please democratic address. The bishops are all brethren under one common fother. The pope is accused of letting himself be wor- shipped. This is not so. But when the Pope comes before the altar he bows down like the humblest of his people. "I confess," say*. he, "to Almighty God, to the blessed Virgin Mary, the holy Apostles, and to all the Saints," the least of whom he therefore acknowied^Sj to be greater than himself, " that I have sinned ;" and this is what is' called setting himself up to be a God ! See how you have been de- ceived by the invidious representations you have had of the pope, and of our doctrine, my friends. -t.^^-.-^ ■• I assert again that the authority quoted by my friend, Mr. C, viz. Du Pin, is no authority. He was the rank enemy of the Roman see, a Jansenist, reproved and censured by the Catholic church. Mr. C. knows this, for I have read to him the documents that prove it, and he was confounded by them. It is neither good faith, nor good logic, to quote him as an authority against my argument. As for the signa- tures appended to the English translation, I care not for them ; they may have been wrongfully placed there, or those certificates suborn- ed. This makes nothing for the authority of the book, and', no argu- ment can be drawn from them. But, my friends, I am sure you dis- covered his discomfiture when he appealed to Du Pin. There was a stumbling block in his way, something he could not get over. I>id you not notice how with the rapid speed of a rail-road car dashing suddenly on an obstruction, he Jled the track, when he I'ound to his as- tonishment that the testimony adduced by his author, was not unfa- vorable to the supremacy of St. Peter, and his successors ! I will examine his writings to show that evien in the thifd century, the bish- ops of Rome claimed this prerogative, and Du/'Pin tells you that this was acknowledged. He says there were three principal bishops. KOMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 23 This is a great admission, and I am thankful for it. He says that even then, bishops came from inferior sees, and laid their conflicting claims before the see of Rome ; and submitted to the chair of Peter, doubts in religious matters ; and urged it to proclaim a solution of their ditHculties ; but he says, they did not believe the pope of Rome infallible. This is granting to the Catholics the whole mooted ques- tion. The question is clearly settled by this admission. Appeals were lodged before the bishop of Rome, though he was not believed to be infallible. Neither is he now. No enlightened Catholic holds the pope's infallibility to be an article of faith. I do not ; and none of my brethren, that I know of, do. The Catholic believes the pope, as a man, to be as liable to error, as almost any other man in the uni- verse. Man is man, and no man is infallible, either in doctrine or morals. Many of the popes have sinned, and some of them have been bad men. I presume my worthy antagonist will take his brush in hand, and roll up his sleeves, and lay it on them hard and heavy ; so will I ; and whenever he uses a strong epithet against them, I will use a stronger. But let us return to the gentleman's authority, Du Pin. We come to the council of Nice, which was held A. D. 325, and where 318 bishops were assembled. This council was convoked by the first christian emperor Constantine the Great, at the suggestion, I mighi have more correctly said the instigation of Sylvester, bishop of Rome, and of course, with his consent. Osius, bishop of Cordo- va, and two legates, Vitus and Vincentlus, presided in it, in the name of the Roman pontiff. The principal doctrine on which the council was assembled to decide, was the divinity of Jesus Christ denied by the Arians. From the manner of the convocation of the council, the circumstance of its having been presided over by the representatives of the pope, or bishop of Rome, the submission of the entire chris- tian world to its decrees, and the authentic records of its transactions which have reached us, we have the most convincing evidences of the reverence which was even then entertained for the successor of St. Peter; and the best practical illustration of the wisdom that estab- lished his prp-erninencH of rank ;iiiioiig his brethren, to watch over the purity of doctrine, the soundness of morals, the uniformity of discipline, and the maintenance of union among the churches. What more direct and satisfactory testimony could we require of the supre- macy of the see of Rome, th;;<;s, and though some writers have seemed to ciiscern a tew detached linlvs wnich they diligently exhi'jited, tljcre is still much wanting to complete tiie continuity." [Pag-e 554 of the History of tlie Churcli from Ihe earliest ages, by Rev. Geo. JVadtlington, A. J^I./illow of Trinity College, Cambridge, and Prebendai-y of Ferriiiz, in the calliairal clnirch if Chichester, J\^eiv Vor'-c edition, 1835.] Well if Christ established a church on earth, that church must be catholic. " I believe in the holy catholic church," is the lan^age of the apostles and of councils, of Protestants as well as of Catholics. The frue church must be catholic. What church then is catholici The universe answers the question — Italy, France, Spain, Austria, Ireland, vSouth America, Canada, five hundred churches lately erected in England, Calcutta, Ceylon, Oceana, all the islands of the Pacific and the Atlantic : even in every country where Protestantism is dom- inant, Denmark, Norwaj', Sweden, the testimony is given, and the words " I believe in the holy catliolic church" are used by the mem- bers of the Roman Catholic church, who alone have a right to use them. Applied to any other church they are a misnomer. Protestants cannot employ such language. They are cut up into a thousand dis- cordant and chaotic sects. As no other church but ours is now cath- olic, so no other but ours ever has been or will be catholic. "Chris- tian is my name and Catholic my surname," said Pacian. With love and charity to all men the Roman Catholic church subsists throughout all time, teaches all truth, and gathers into her communion the children of every clime. What she lost in one region, she gained in another. The a.xe of persecution that loi)ped off some of her branches, mad© the vigorous trunk produce the more luxuriously. " hutsligating," any s l letclicr, " in tliose countries, wiiere either Christianity has once subsisted, or where it subsists at j)rcsent — the motDimcnIs which they exhibit, and interrogating these (motiiimenis have voices, my brethren, that speaK plainly,) — it will be found that they all loudly attest the greatness and the an- tiquity of our religion. " IVe are Catholics," the veneiabU: ruins say, "and the emblems even, which still adorn us, shew it." It is so. likewise, not only in the nionuni»-nt9, which were once, or are yet, sacred to religion, but in a great variety of other vestiges. The proofs of the ancient splendor of Catholicity are legible on aIiiio»t every object, that has seen the tiile of ages roll away, — on the palaces of prinre«,— on the castles of the great, — on the gates of cities, — on the asylums of charity, — on the tombs of the ffead. They may be read in the con- stitutions and laws of kingdoms — in the foundations and rules of universities,— in the customs and peculiarities of the vulgar. «»»«»» It is indeed, possible that prejudice may object to those arguments, that, "they are very general and inclistliicl, — proving, it is true, that in almost every nation, and in every age, there has existed a wiifely dirt'usetl religion, — a Catliolic religion, but not proving that this religion, its principles and doctrines, were in every age the same — in every age, the identical religion, which the Catholic be- lieve* at present." It is the essence of the true religion to remain unchanged; and to have desienderl.and to descend always, down the streamuf time, without corruption or alteration. If, therefore, I unrlerlake rlistinrlly to prove, that the Catholic religion of the present period is indeed, the true religion, then should I also distinctly prove that it has never undergone iinv alterntion, and that it is the same, which, revealed originally to mankind, has, during the course of eigh- teen centuries, formed alwayt the object of the veaeratioo of the, orthodox be- liever." vol. 2, p. 173. C 4 26 DEDATK OA Tllffi " As it 5TU- tlie dis'ijn of GoJ, tliat llie true cliurcu slioiilti h.-. Catlinlii- ; lo it tins also hin design, that the true church shouKl ulwavs be distiiituished by the honorable iippfllation of Culholic: — as it ivas the will of Jesus Ciirist, that the establi?-hinent whicli he formed, should 3ELL rise*. My learned and worthy opponent commenced his forenoon speech, Baying that he found before him a more easy task than he had expect- ed. Were it a question of rhetoric rather than of logic, I confess I should have more to fear. He has been more accustomed than I, to the display of that art. I am rather a matter of fact man, and logic more than rhetoric has occupied my attention. I apprehend, however, before this discussion is ended he may find his task not quite so easy as he would seem to anticipate. And to me the good book has suggested a caution which I hope always to remem- ROMAN CATHOLIC KELIGIOX. 27 ber. It is happily couched in these words, " Let not him that buck- leth on his armor boast as he that taketh it off." But to examine his defence, so far as in it there is reference to my speech, has he not made in the very first effort an unfortunate admis- sion 1 The name Catholic he admits is generic and the name Roman specific, — and that the term Roman only indicated the church in which this catholic communion is to be enjoyed : that the universal church is found in the particular, the genus in the species. Thus we can have Greek catholic, English catholic, American catholic, as v.-ell as Roman catholic. These particular universals are susceptible of indefinite multiplication. And so the catholicity of Rome is specifi- cally the same with that of England ! ! His second admission is equally unfortunate. He did not seem to perceive that he argued for me rather than against me, on the word father. He said that it could not be understood literally. So said I. How then must it be used but religiously 1 Call no ma.n your religious or ecclesiastic Father. He has then fully conceded all that I ask. It is then an absolute prohibition of the Roman Catholic notion of a supreme holy father. To designate any person pope is then a viola- tion of Christ's command. The gentleman has admitted, somewhat reluctantly however, that the Doway catechism is a standard work, and that the definition of the church is infallibly correct. My argument hitherto has been to shew that the supreme head called pope, being of the essential ele- ments, nay the chief element of the Roman Catholic church, and not found either in the bible or ecclesiastic history for ages after the chris- tian era, the church of Rome is a sect in the true import of that word, and not the mother and mistress of all churches, for she cannot be older tiian her head, unless a body can exist without and before its head, which is impossible. It is not the nature of that head, whether political or ecclesiastic or both, but the simple fact of its existence concerning which we enquire. The nature and claims of the head may hereafter lie the subject of exaniinalion. That tlie Roman sect is divided into four parties, touching the supremacy — one affirming lliat the pope is tho fountain of all ])owrr |)oUtical and religious — another t«,'actiing that lie has only ecclesiastic supremacy — a third party affirming that bis ecclesiastic dominion is over all councils, per- sons and things spiritual, and a fourth party limiting his jurisdiction to a sort of executive presidency — is a proposition susceptible of ample proof, and of much importance, but we wish it to be very distinctly stated that the question now before us is the fact that a head, or universal father, pope or patriarch, is not found in tlie Roman empire, east or west, for six hundred years, and consequently that during that time that church did not exist, whose four essential ele- ments, are a pope or supreme head, liishops, pastors and laity. I arn the mort; diffuse on this point because my learned opponent seems to mistakr; the question or to confound it with another of a diffe- rent category. He seems to lie squinting at infalli4)ility, aulliiirity, order in the ministry, rather than looking \n the face the simple ques- tion, wtu thrrr. n pope in any church for thi: first six centuries ? Authority is not infallibility, nor is order, supremacy. I go for autiiority in tho president of the I'nited States, but who infers thence tiiat I hold tho president to be infallible I I go for order in the christian church, but what has thiB to do with the supremacy of the bishop of Roraol 28 DEBAT5 O.-V Tim Why, I emphatically ask, does the bishop of Cincinnati confound th» question of fact before us with that concerning the Lcvitical priest- hood. I have not agitated such a question. And what have my views of ciiurch order and government to do with the question before us. Why drag these matters into discussion. Did I not distinctly saj'^ tliat I came not here to defend the tenets of any ])arty of Protestants, l)Ut the great principles of Protestantism? And what have my views of church order to do with the questions at issue! Of these however the gentleman is wholly misinformed. I am the advocate of order, of a christian ministry, of bisiiops and deacons in the church. Without order no society can exist, and therefore no reasonable man can object citlicr to order or authority in the church. But again I ask what is this to the question in debate ! He gave us too a dissertation on the passage, " lovest thou me more than these." This is certainly gratuitous at this time. I am glad however the gentleman- has delivered himself on this text. But this is not the question now. We are seeking for a head for the church, a papal head for the church in the first ages, while our friend is ex- pounding scriptures on other themes. To the authority of Du Pin the gentleman seems to except. But on what authority does he object] His works are certified by the doctors of the Sorbonne and by the guardians of the Catholic press. Will he say that he is not an authentic historian? Du Pin was born and educated, lived and died and was buried in the Roman Catholic church. The gentleman proved, two or three months ago, that general La Fayette was a Roman Catholic because he was baptized in the church of Rome and buried in consecrated ground. Certainly then Du Pin was all this and more ! It matters not whether he was a Jan- senist or Jesuit. Both orders have been at different times in good and bad repute. Jansenists have sometimes been proscribed, and Jesuits have been suppressed. But th'e question is not, was he a good Ca- tholic, but was he an authentic historian ? For a good Catholic is one thing, and a good historian is another. I wish the gentleman to answer. (Bishop Purcell. 1 answer emphatically, he was not an au- thentic historian.) Then this gentleman and the bishop of Bardstown are at variance. The latter gentleman, if I mistake not, admitted in a discussion pub- lished in the Catholic paper of that place, that Du Pin was an authen- tic historian. I have seen this work repeatedly quot^ed in discussions between Romanists and Protestants, and I do not recollect to have seen any thing advanced against his authenticity. Mr. Hughes of Philadelphia, but on different grounds than those stated by my opponent, did indeed object to him as a faithful witness in his controversy with Mr. Brcckenridge. However while I wish it to go to the public that bishop Purcell has objected to Du Pin as an autlientic historian, I will distinctly state that I rely upon him in this controversy only so far as he is sustained by other historians, and therefore I will only quote him in such matters as I know can be sustained from other sources. Other historians record the same fact, and many of the works which Du Pin quotes are not only extant but accessible. The word catholic the gentleman has stated that it is of high anti- quity and found at the head of some books of the New Testament. But how came it into the New Testament? Was it Robert Stephens ef Paris that placed it there in the IGth century as a sort of general KOMAX CATHOLIC RELIGIO:;. 29 heading to certain epistles, or was it placed there by the apostles themselves] Touching the council of Nice and whether Sylvester had anything to do with its convocation, may hereafter be worthy of discussion ; at present this is not before us. The decree of the council and its convocation are distinct things. Of the texts relied on by me to dispose of the pretensions of supre- macy, the gentleman has taken special exception to Ep. iv. 11. and would have different orders of ecclesiastic powers, rather than g'fts for the edification of the church and the fitting of saints for the work of the ministrj', to be contained in that passage. But the text says gifts and not lordships. Of these gifts vouchsafed by the ascended Savior the first was apostles. " He gave first apostles, secondarily prophets," and here again " he gave some apostles and some pro- phets." No supremacy is expressed of an individual. It is not ranks of authorities like civil or military functionaries, such as magistrates, aldermen, constables, &c., but gifts of light and knowledge and grace, the splendid gifts of the Holy Spirit. Gifts of teaching, preaching, ex- horting, and setting up the tabernacle or cliurch. The apostles had all authority and all gifts themselves; but they needed assistants and a distribution of labor, and not an hierarchy, in laying the foundation and in fitting saints for the work of the christian ministry. Having now touched all the relevant points in the Bishop's opening speech, I hasten to my argument. On examination of the New Testament, the primitive fathers, the councils both provincial and general, down to the close of the Gth cen- tury, we do not find in the whole territory claimed by our opponents as yet, the idea or name of a supreme head, pope, or vicar of Christ. j\Iy learned antagonist has not produced any such document, and doubtless he knows if there be any such authority now extant, and would produce it. The strong expressions of Saint Gregory in opposition to the title shew what a singular novelty it was in Rome during "his pontifi- cate," and his bold declaration not only of the arrogance and blas- phemy of the title, hilt of its aspfcl to all the bishnps, as annulling tlieir cfiuality, sulheicntly prove tliat he rigblly approc-iatcd its true meaning and its hostility to the genius of that simi)licity and humility which comportfid with the servants of Christ. So far tlien as we have examined the evidence on iiand, the defence of the Bishnj), the argu- ment as now developed stands tlnis : — a ])ope, or universal ])atriarcli, is the first essential element of the Roman Catbolie sect. iJnt there was no such personage in existence for GOO years after (/brist, there- fore there was no church of Rome, in the sense of the creed, during the first six centuries. We are now prepared to narrate the circumstances whieh ushered into being the ])ope of Rome. Mauritius the emperor of the K-aM per«vi r< d in th' ir oininnnion." St. Athanasius writes to St. Felix, the Roman Pontiff: " For tliii |)urpf)sc Christ ijlaced you and vour predecessors to guide the ark •nd to have the care of all trie churches, that von may help u»." St. Cyprian, in his 55th Epistle, holds the following language: "They dare to sail and carry l< tier* to the choir of Fcler and the priDcipal church, whence tacrrdotal unity proceed*." 3(J DEBATE ON TME St. Aufrustin, who wrote in thn fifth century, mentions the following among otlior motives of erodihility in favor of the Catholic religion. "Tlitre are many other tliiiifjs wliicli keep luc in the bosuni of the Catholic church. The agreement ol tliltereiit people and nations kee|is me tliere. The authority e!ital)lislie(l by miracles, nourished by liopc, increased by charity, and confirnu'd by antiquity, keeps me there. The succi ssion of bisiiops in the see of St. Peter, tlie apostle (to whom our Lord after his resurrection, committed his sheep to be fed) down to the present bisliop, keeps nie there. Finally the very name of Cathoijc which, among so many heresies, this church alone possesses, keeps nie there." St. Jerome in his 4th Epistle to pope Damasus says: "I, following no leailer but (lirlst, am in communion with your holiness, that is, with the chair of Peter. Whoever {;athereth not with you scattereth, that is, whoever is not of Christ is of anti-Christ." This is, in substance, the testimony of the bishops throughout the world, in every age to the present time. — [Time expired.] Four o'' clock, P. 31. Mr. Campbell rose and said : On the subject of the emendation of the term Roman Catholic, by prefixiniT the word English, &c., I am willing that my friend should nave all the advantage to be derived from that explanation. I am willing that he should appear before the public with that explanation, if he thinks it can help the matter. On the same principle he may say the Philadelphia Pittsburg church of Cincinnati. The church, I argued, had no mortal head for six hundred years. He certainly could not have understood me as denying that Christ was the head of his church ! I admit that Christ is the immortal head of the church which is his body, and Christ is her only head. Christ's church re- quires a living and omnipresent head. She needs not two heads, for her head is the head of all principality and power. Can the pope be omnipresent, keeping order in all his dominions] I was surprised at the gentleman's hypothesis, that if I argued that the church had no visible and human head for six hundred years, I then asserted that Christ was not the head of his church. I spoke not of Christ, but of the great hierarch on earth, who claims to be the fountain of all power and authority in the church. Could he not understand me 1 The gentleman says, that the Catholics are as free as others. I ask have they the same liberty to read the Bible, to think and act for themselves, as have the Protestants ] I am sorry that he seemed to take advantage of my acknowledging myself a friend to bishops and deacons in the church. In my enumeration of the ditfercnt orders, in the present Roman church, I mentioned ./^rcA-bishops and .^rcA-deacons ; but he did not hear me say bishops and deacons. They were on pur- pose loft out of that enumeration, that I might not fall into the error which he has imagined for me. I dispose of the gentleman's extract from the Millennial Harbinger and of his learned remarks upon them, by informing him that he ha3 mistaken the writer : I am not the author of the article in question. Still I must ask, why this evasion of the question in debate? Why seek to excite the odium theologicum, on account of some distorted theory unjustly attributed to mo — on subjects, too, wholly foreign to this debate ! Are these the weapons by which my learned opponent is connppllod to defend the " mo/A"/- and mfnfre^s of all chtirches" from EOMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 87 the charge of unscriptural, and unfounded assumptions'? Let no one imagine, however, tliat I am at all opposed to order and government in the church. As far as concerns oversight, or the having of bishops to preside over the flock, I am an Episcopalian. lam for having pres- byters or elders in every church. I do not believe in a church without presbyters or bishops. So far I am both a Presbyterian and an Epis- copalian. On the subject of the primacj'' of Rome, the gentleman quoted Bar- ronius, and snarled at Du Pin. But it is too late for any bishop of Rome, or of England to stand up in this nineteenth century and tell us that Du Pin is not an authentic historian. My friend intimates that the certificates in the preface were suborned. What a charge on the learned and venerable author of this work ! \_Bish(tp Purcell here said, that those certificates being in the hook pro- ved nothing : — that they might have been put there by the printer. "l I will now read these attestations and vouchers that you may judge how gratuitous arc the objections and insinuations of the bishop. THE APPROBATION OF THE DOCTORS OF THE SORBONNE. "The whole world lias openly declared the esteem which they think due to the JS'ew History of Ecclesiastical Writers, that we could not but be sensible of the complaisance shewn to us, since the judgment we had formed of it was followed, supported and authorized by that of the public. "All those who have already read them, will here find what will recall to their raemory many things they may have forgotten, and will see with pleasure, that our author has reduced their doctrines to certain principles, by whicli they show their solidity and coherence. Those who wish to read them will here meet with what will save them much time and trouble; and those that are engaged in that long and wearisome journey, will at least have tlie advantage of a faithful and experienced guide, who will lead them only through paths equally sate and known. Both the one and the other will meet with a piece of criticism which is always clear, prudent, and upright ; distinguishes what is certain from that which is false or doubtful; never precipitates the judgment, nor lavs down sini- ple conjectures in place of demonstrative proofs; gives to every thing what it merits, purely on its own account ; and the better to attend to reason, banishes all prejudices and looks at nothing in its search after truth, but truth itself; nor condenms, only, where it cannot excuse. "Given at Paris, August 18lb, 1688. HLAMPIGNON, Rector of St. Merris. IlIDKUX, K< ctor of St. Innocents." AI'PRonATION OF THE ROVAF- CENSOR. " By the order of my lord (Jhanrellor; 1 have read a book, entitled "A History of the churcli and ff Krclcsiaslical Jlulhors in the sixteenth century " bv Mes- sieur Lewis Kllifs Du I'in, 1'ries.t, Doctor of Divinity of the Faculty of I'nris, and Regius Professor of I'hiloso|)hy ; Containing th<' History of the Church, and of ecclesiastical Authors, and "from the year 1550, to the year 1600; in which I find nothing to hinder its b'^ing printed. "Given this 18lh i\:\y of January, 170:}. BLAMPIGNON, Curate of St. Merris." APPROnATION OF THF, rX)CTORS OF DIVIMTY OF THE FACUETV OF I'ARIS. " VVc whose names are under written. Doctors of Divinity of the I'nculty of Divinity of I'nris, nrtily, that we have examined a book, entitled "A History of the Chiirrh, and of i-irlesiastinil Authors, in the sixteenth cenlurv;" b\ Meg- tienr Lewis Lilies Du Pin, Priest, Doctor of Divmity of the Family of Paris, and Rrgitis Profossor of Philosojjliy : and that we havi; found nothing therein contrary to the G«tholic faith, or to ^oorl manners. In assurance whereof, wa have set our haadi this 20th day of Jannarv, 170;{. IU,ANlPlGi\Oi\, Curat* of St. Merrii. HIDEUX, CurBt«of St. Innorfntg." D ^Vyillit 38 DEBATE ON THE I put it now to the good sense of my audience, whether such testi- monies arc to be set aside, by saying that the printer may have forged or printed tliem on his own responsibility. The divine Avarrant for tlic primacy of the pope is not the question on which the gentleman read from Barronius. There are two things in every historj', — the statement of facts, and the comment on those facts. The opinion of the historian is like the opinion of the reader; but the facts stated are common property ; and these are the proper materials of his work. Barronius does not, however, on the point in debate, state a fad contrary to Du Pin. There were, indeed, prima- cies at Alexandria, Antioch, Rome, Constantinople, Jerusalem. But the primacy of a metropolitan, and the doctrine of Sn universal pri- macy over all metropolitans at any one place, is a different matter. I could not understand in what sense he meant to be understood when he said Gregory could not go for primacy in " that sense." Was there a peculiar mysterious meaning attached to the claim or title which Gregory reprobated 1 It has not been proved that any contem- porary understood it so. I affirm that there was not an intelligent Catholic of that day who understood the title of universal patriarch, in any other sense than that in which, it is understood among us now. The person first established in the primacy of Rome exercised a uni- versal superintendcncy over the church exactly similar to that first claimed by the bishop of Constantinople. My friend says, ' the author from whom he read you states the fact of such a primacy early in the Roman Church.' If we examine the authority we shall see, it is nothing but tlic opinion of a fallible ma*!; and that opinion contrary to all ancient history. I affirm that there is no ecclesiastical historian of authority, who attests the fact, which he is desirous to prove. It is one thing to state a fact, as a historian, and another to state an opinion or commentary on a fact. The ques- tion before us, is not the metropolitan primacy of Rome, or Antioch, or Alexandria ; but the universal primacy of the whole church ! I admit, as to the council of Nice, what it was said Du Pin asser- ted, viz. ' that the sixth canon does not deny the primacy of Rome.' But Du Pin goes further, — (and why did not the gentleman read all that Du Pin asserts'?) 1 read it all. I told the whole truth respect- ing it — the gentleman has told you but the half of it — Du Pin says " this canon does not preclude the idea :" but " ncither,^^ says he, ^^does it establish z7." I am for quoting the whole authority. Du Pin, as a Catholic, was endeavoring to find some authority for supporting the antiquity of the primacy of the see of Rome. He is examining the canons of the comicil carefully, and he says that though this canon does not preclude tlie primacy, "vet neither does it establish it." It afforded him nothing for or against it. And what other decree or council did establish it 1 ! That ig a secret the bishop will never reveal. Let us now return to my argument. I left off at the year 750, and was in pursuit of the day, when the present church of Rome began. I hasten to establish it. It would be both tedious and unnecessary to read, or narrate the quarrels between Nicholas of Rome and Photius of ^Constantinople, on the vital question who shall be the greatest 1 wt^t greatly pre- pared the way for the grand schism. We have not time for this, as we are now, before we sit down, ti^give you the day and date of the ROMA^• CATHOLIC KELIGIOX. 39 separation of the Roman church from the Greek church, which must be regarded as the day of her separate existence, when she became what she now is, a schism, or sed. There was a violent contest between the patriarch of Constantinople and the patriarch of Rome, or pope, if you please, (for I state em- phatically, that the idea of a supreme head of the church had never been digested in the east, and though the eastern church may have submitted, or acquiesced for the time being, she never did consent to it). The promotion of the layman Photius, gifted and splendid as he was, to the primacy of Constantinople, greatly vexed his holiness of Rome. Indeed, from the time of Victor, bishop of Rome, A. D. 197, who assumed to exercise jurisdiction out of his proper diocese, in respect to the observance of Easter, there never was a cordial feel- ing of unity, or co-operation between the eastern and western por- tions of the church. The arrogance of Victor, called for strong ex- pressions of insi^)ordination on the part of the Asiatic brethren, who claimed for themselves as much license to dictate to the western, as he had to the eastern church. The " Catholic" body was not yet divided into two great masses. Photius had charge of the church of Constantinople. Nicholas of Rome was indignant that a layman should hold the high dignity of patriarch of the eastern church, however the emperor and the church might think. To make matters worse, they excommunicated each other, which laid the foundation of dissentious and bad feelings, which to this very day, never have been atoned. For the jealousies and ri- valries of these two bishops never slumbered nor slept, till the church was divided into what have since been called the Greek and Ijatin churches. All iiistorians, give substantially the same account of this matter. I will read an extract or two from Du Pin. "riiou;^li tin: Latin aiiO Grcfck cliurchi s were nut in clusi; comiiiunion with each other ever since the allair of Photius, yet tlir y did not proceed to an open rup- ture till the tiiut- of pope Leo IX. and oi Michael Ccrularius, patriarch of Con- stantinople. This breach beijan by a letter which the latter wrote in the year 1053, in his own name, and in the name of Leo archbishop of Acridia and of all Bulgaria, to John bishop "Of Trani in Jlpiilin, that he niii;ht communicate it to the pope and to all the wing to them, actually cursed and anathe- matized the pope of Rome, a proof perliaps of the amiable character the gentleman gives the enemies of order and of the pope, but a suf- ficient reason why the pope should exert all his authority in protect- ing the church from their usurpations. But the three legates to whoni the rommissjon was entrusted, car- ried the bull of excor uiiicalion in tlnir pockets, and they are made to appear very treacherous because they did not produce It at once, but tried by pacific measures to bring about a reconciliation. Is it in the gentleman's eHtimation, then, an evidence of treachery, to rcKort to persuasive means with an eufrny, hcfnrf a|)pealiiig to thr sword and involving one's country in war? "Suppose the presnlenl of the United States sends a minister to a foreign country to obtain the settlement D 2 6 42 UKHAIi; o.\ lllK of a disputed question. Does that minister begin by declaring war, " y forcing his proposal with a bayonet down the throats of the peo- le to Avhom he is accredited 1 No, he tries every mild means first. by forcing his proposal with a bayonet down the throats of the peo- ple to Avhom he is accredited 1 No, he tries every mild means first. The contrary course would be neither politic nor wise, neither humane nor in accordance with the rules of civilized society. The great and the peculiar character of the people of the United States, is neither to provoke nor to brook aggression. If her rights are violated, she endeavors to convince the violator of his injustice, to disabuse him of his error, to win liim back to a sense of rectitude by persuasion and just remonstrance. ' If this fails, she resorts to arms, and though she loves peace she is prepared for war. In a word she is terribly peaceful. Now mark the course of the legates. They entreat Michael to reconsider his conduct, they urge every argument that zeal can sug- gest, but finding all their eflbrts fruitless, they afterwards act in pur- suance of their instructions, \\ith perfect ingenuousness and openness. Observe their procedure. They ascend the altar of the great church of St. Sophia, the seventh wonder of the world — at whose portals stood that large vase for the holy water, wherewith Greeks and Ro- mans, commemorating the sprinkling of the blood of Christ, by which our consciences are purified from dead works to serve the living God, were accustomed alike to bless themselves; and on which were in- scribed the Greek words "NfWtv h^ifAUfx-xTx [xm y.ov:t} o4"'" " purify O God, our transgressions, and not our countenance only." They went on the altar and in a formal speech explained to the assembled multi- tude what were the grounds of the anathema. The crime of Mi- chael was that in defiance of the prohibitions both of the old and new law, he had made eunuchs priests. He was also accused of Arian- ism. Now the Arians deny the divinity of Christ — I have heard from some of our most respectable citizens, that Mr. Campbell also denies that cardinal dogma, but I do not vouch for the correctness of their assertion. (Mr. Campbell here stated that he did not deny the divinity of Christ.) It appears pretty plain from history that the people were for the legates and opposed to their own usurping archbishop. Why? "The legates flattered them." But how ? So far from it their whole argument was directed against a man living amongst this very people, and for an individual i'ar distant. It is natural to suppose that the people were prejudiced in favor of their own archbishop and against one who was a stranger to them. In short, were they not speaking against the primacy and the assumptions of the ecclesiastical dignitary of the very church in which they spoke, andof the very people to whom they spoke. Did they flatter the clergy ] no ; they strongly inveighed against the unscriptural and uncanonical ordination of the odious eu- nuchs, by whom the patriarch was surrounded. This was a fine il- lustration of the zeal for sound doctrine and discipline, displayed in every previous and subsequent age by the holy see. It was acting on the apostolic maxim — It is better to obey God than man — That duties are ours and consequences are God's. " Oh Timothy, guard the deposit" (of faith) said St. Paul. "Now the spirit iiianifesdy saith, that in the last tiiiKs, some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to spirits of error, speaking lies in hypocrisy, liaving their consciences seared with a red hot iron. These things proposing to the brethren thou shall be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of the faith and of the good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained." — IrtEp. to Tim. ch. iv. v. 1. 2. 6. ROMAN CATHOLIC Rr.LIGIOX. 43 Thus on this occasion did the pope. My friend could not understand in what sense the patriarch of Con- stantinople claimed the title of universal bishop ; and wanted to learn how his claim diflered from the present understanding of the office. He has the answer in this history of facts. He has, cr his authority Du Pin has for him, admitted that this Michael had said in effect that he was Lord God over all the earth; and that there was no authorit)^ without his sanction for any officer of the church to perform any of the ordinances of religion. Even the pope of Kome must crouch to his feet before he could administer the eucharist or even baptize an infant. And the historian says that the document accusing the arch- bishop was read before the people of Constantinople — the very city where he reigned, where he was known, and where all the facts of the case were before them. What is the most natural supposition'? Surely this ; that if that document had not been true the people would have cried out against it ; — they would not have assented toil. So that all this is a splendid triumph of the supremacy of the Koman see. But why refer to particular instances, when ecclesiastical history is full of appeals made to the bishop of Rome by all the other bishops of Christendom, and all acquiescing in his decision as not only the de- cision of Peter, but of Christ himself. "The extraordinary commis- sion given to Paul," says Bossuet, " expired with him in Rome, and blending with the authority of Peter, to which it was subordinate, raised the Roman see to the height of authority and glory. This is the church which, taught by Peter and his successors, has never been infected with heresy. This power of binding and loosing from sin, was given first to Peter and then to the rest of the twelve apostles. For it was manifestly the design of Jesus Christ, to place first in one what lie afterwards intended to confer on many, but the sequel impairs not the commencement, nor docs the first lose his place. All receive the same power from the same source, but not all in the same degree, nor to the same extent, for Jesus Christ communicates himself as he pleases, and always in the manner best calculated to establish the uni- ty of the churcii." " Peter," says St. Augustin, " who, in the honor of his |)rimaf,y, rcpresenied tlie entire elnirch, iirsl and alone, receives the keys, which were next to be coinmuiiieateil to all the; rHlicrs." The reason of this is assigned l)y St. Covaives of Aries, thiitllie ee(;i(;siastical authority, first estahiished in a single bishop, and afterwards diffused among many, may be forever brought back to the principle of unity, and remain inseparably united in tlie same cliair. This is tin; Roman chair, the chair of Peter so much celebrated hy the Fathers, in which they vied with one another in extolling the principality of the ajiostolic chair, the principal principality, the source of unity, tiie mother church, the head (or centre) of the episcopacy, whence parts the ray of government, the chief, the only see which bindeth all in unity." In these words you iiear Uptatus, St. Augustin, St. (!y|)rian, St. Irenwus, St. Prosper, St. Avitus, Theodoret, the council of Chalccdon, Africa and (laul, Greece and Asia, tiie east and the west united toge- ther. This is the doctrine of all the chureii ; this is its unity and strength. Here all is strong because all is divine, all is united. And as each part is divine, the bond also is divine, and the union and arrangement such that each mrmber acts with the force of the ontiro body. Henco whilst the ancient bishops said, they exercised author- 44 DBBATH ON THE ity in their respective churches as the vicars of Jesus Christ and suc- cessors of the apostles sent immediately by him, they also declared that they acted in the name of Peter in virtue of the authority given to all bishops in the person of Peter ; so that the correspondence, the union and harmony of the entire body of tiic church are such that what one bishop does, in accordance with the spirit and rules of Catholic unity, all the church, all the Episcopacy, and the chief of the Episco- pacy act in concert and accomplish with him. My friend observes that the Greeks were always uneasy under the Roman popedom. I admit this to a great extent, but St. .John, and Polycarp, and Itrtntius and Irenanis (his naine signifies Peace, or the peaceful) and Eusebius and Chrysostom and a hundred others were Greeks, and the most eloquent advocates, and the ablest supporters of the preeminence of the church of Rome above all other churches. Here then is a cloud of witnesses who furnish an astonishing mass of testimony to the fact that in the early days, the Greek church as well as the Latin submitted willingly to the authority of St. Peter and his successors — the authority necessar}' to preserve order and peace and unity, &c. in the church of God on earth. With regard to the controversy of the gentleman with Bishop Otey ; there was a mooted point between Mr. Campbell and himself. I un- derstood however that all the discussion was on Mr. Campbell's side. (Mr. Campbell here explained that he had had a private discussion with Bishop Otey, and had afterwards written him seven letters upon the Episcopacy.) Bishop Pcrcell. I really do not know what Mr. Campbell's tenets are, or what he believes. My brethren, I am fifjlitirig in the dark. I am obliged to answer on the spot charges and objections against myre- ligion which I cannot anticipate, while I really know not \vhat my antagonist's belief is, what qualifications, what marks of a divine call to the ministry ho considers necessary, if indeed he believes in any peculiar separation of any man or set of men, for priestly functions. Will my friend say definitely, before this assembly, if he believe in the necessity of such call or mission. Mr. Campbell. I do. Bishop Purcell. How is that calling made known, that mission given? Mr. Caimpbei.l. By the word and providence of God. Bishop Purcell. How can we ascertain that word and providence of God 1 Mr. Campbell. By the voice of the people and the written word — '• vox populi vox Dei." Bishop Purcell. Suppose the people are displeased, for instance, with a Presbyterian pastor, have they the sole power to remove him? Mr. Campbell. Yes. Bishop Purcell. Suppose the ministry of a Presbyterian church are displeased with him, and the people of his church are pleased with him. May be then retain his station against the will of the ministry? Mr. Campbell. If the people will have it so, it must be so. " Vox populi, vox Dei"! Bishop Purcell. There my brethren, you have heard him! Such dpclarations ! ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGIOrt. 45 SATURDAY, January 14th., Half past 9 o'clock, A. M. Mr. Campdei.i. rose and said : I shall resume the subject where I closed yesterday evening, reserv- ingr my remarks on the last speech of my opponent till the conclusion of my present argument. The gentleman read in the various reasons assigned for the bull of Nicholas, against the patriarch of Constantinople and his brethren, among others, the statement that the Greeks pretended to be the only true, catholic and apostolic church. It would not be difficult to prove from history that in point of seniority, the Greek church has a superior claim to the Roman. It is first in point of time, and claims a regular descent from the apostles. There is one strong argument in her favor which never has been met. To her belong the first seven councils. They were held in Grecian cities, called by Grecian emperors, and composed of Grecian bishops. They were wholly Grecian. The Ro- man church has no right to claim them. And if the doctrines proclaim- ed by these councils be true, they are the doctrines of the Greek church subsequently borrowed by the Romans. As this is an important point, I will expatiate a little more fully up- on it. I have taken the trouble to collect the following facts: at the finl council of Nice there were 318 bishops: of these 315 were Greek and 3 Roman. This was the first general council, A. D. 325. At the first council of Constantinople, (the second general council of the church,) A. D. 381. there were 150 bishops ; of these 149 were Greeks, and only 1 was Roman. At the third council held at Ephesus, A. D. 431, there were but G8 bishops present. Of these 67 were Greek, and one was Roman. At the fourth general council, which was the largest and most authoritative of the first four, held at Chalcedon A. D. 451, against Kutyches, there were present 353 bishops: 350 of whom were Greeks, and only 3 Roman. At the second council of Constantinople {iheffth general council) there were presetit IGl bishops: 15G of whom were Greeks, and C> Romans — held against Origen and others, A. D. 553. At the third council of Constantinople, (and the s/.r//( gen- eral council,) there were 5G bishops present : 51 of whom were (ireeks, and 5 Romans. This council met against the Monothelitcs A. D. G80. At the second roimcil of Nice, (the seventh general council,) there were present 377. bishops; 370 f>f whom were (ireeks, and 7 Romans. Th y met to restore images, A. D. 787. These were the firxt seven genera/ councils of the church. I have been at the pains to make this collection of facts, to ascertain the merits of the controversy between the Greek and Roman sects, as respects the question to whom of right bflontr liie (If)ftrines of the ancient councils. 1 find that the ■whole nnnihrr of bishops in these councils was 118G: only 'JG of whom were Romans, f'ertainly the Greek church has the prior claim on our.attenlion, and ought to be revered for her antiquity and author- ity, more than the schism which haughtily separated from her ! Hut, in adilitifju to thesr- councils having been called — not by the authority of the church of Rome : but by eastern emperors, and com- posed of eastern bishoj)s; every great question discussed in the first four; and, indeed, I rnay add, in the last three counciln, was of Gre- 40 DEBATE ON TUB cian orisfin. Tliey grew up in the Greek school — a school easily dis- tinguished from the Latin, by the peculiar subtiliy of its definitions — a school long accustomed to nice distinctions, and whose reasoners could split the thousandth part of an idea. Of this, their wars about homousion and /innionusios are ample proof. There are no questions more purely abstract and nietnpliysical than many of those discussed in these seven great ecumpnical co\mcils. Again, these councils were not only called by Greeks, composed of Greeks, and occupied about Greek questions ; but were all assembled in Grecian cities. If there be any virtue in councils to establish doctrines and the prior- ity of churches, the Greek church must be considered the mother of the Roman, rather than her daughter. At all events, it is fully proved that the Roman Catholic church is a sect or schism, which is the bur- then of the proposition before us. To strengthen this conviction, I proceed to comment on a standard definition of Catholicity. I would now ask if there be any objection to the book which I hold in my hand, as a good Roman Catholic authority. I believe it to be the true standard of the Roman Catholic church. It is " //«e doctrine of the council of Trent, as expressed in the creed of pope Pius the IV." But ■while the word "catholic" is in my eye, I am reminded that my friend has asserted, ' that catholic is a scripture title of the church.' I reply that it is not so used in the New Testament; and that it is only found as a general, running title to some epistles : that its antiquity is very doubtful, as it cannot be found in the body of the book ; and, con- sequently, it has no authority. But now for the defiiiition from the approved standard of the church: Section IV. Under the head, " Tliat ihechurch of Christ is CATHOLIC or Universal," it is asked. What do you understand by this ? Answer. "Not only that the church of Christ shall always be known by the name of Catholic, by which she is called in the creed; but that she shall also be truly Catholic or Universal by being the church of all ages and nations." p. 15. We have been showing that the church of Christ was not originally known by the name catholic ,- that the Roman sect was not the church of the first six centuries ; and, therefore, that the approved definition of the creed will not apply to this party. I have proved that she had no pope, or supreme head, for full six hundred years, and in corrobora- tion of the argument, drawn from general councils, I have shown that the first seven were not hers, but peculiarly those of the Greek church; and that the Greek church is, in fact, the mother. But there are yet other, and perhaps stronger arguments to show her daughtership. Some of my audience can appreciate the following: That the Hebrew is a more ancient language than the Greek, and the Greek than the Roman, needs not be stated but for a few. One proof of this fact is, that the Hebrew has given many words to the Greek, while the Greek has given none to the Hebrew. So the Greek has given many words to the Latin, while the Latin has given none to the Greek. Thus we prove the Roman church to have come out of the bosom of the Greek, from the fact, that all the leading ecclesiastical terms in the Roman church are Greek. For example : ^^pope," ^^patri- arch" '■'■ synod" "ecclesiastic,'''' "schism" "schismatic " "heresy," "here- tic," "heresiarch," "catechumen," "hierarchy," "church," "chrism," R05LVN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 47 ''exorcism^'' '■'akoluiM," ''diocess,'' ''presbytery,''' ''trimly," "mystery," "mystic," "catholic," "canon," &c., &c., &c. This as fully proves the seniority of the Greek church, as it does that of the Greek lan- guage over the Latin. All ancient ecclesiastical historians, are also Greeks, such as Euse- bius, Socrates, Scholasticus, Evagrius Scholasticus, Sozomon, Theo- doret. The most ancient and primitive fathers are also Greek. They were models to the Latins and imitated in their writings. To recapitulate, we have now shown that the Greek church is more ancient than the Latin church ; because the first seven general councils were all Greek, there being 1186 Grecian bishops and only 2G Roman bishops present, they were called by Greek emperors, held in Greek cities, and employed about Greek questions. The leading ecclesiastic terms of all the ancient offices, customs and controversies, are Greek : So are the early fathers and liistorians. These considerations superadded to the facts and documents of yes- terday, we think fully prove that the Roman church is not the church of all ages and of all nations — not the catholic and apostolic church, as the creed of Trent defines; but a sect, a branch or schism, from the Hebrew and Greek churches of the New Testament. In proving the proposition before us my plan is to select one of the grand elements embraced in the standard definition of the church, and to show that such being essential to the church, the church could not exist without it. Now, I prefer the arithmetical mode of procedure in this discussion. First lay down the rule and work a single question, and then leave it to others to work as many as they please. Thus I first laid down a definition of the Roman Catholic church from her own standards. From that it appeared that a pope or univer- sal bishop is an essential element of her existence. T then showed that six hundred years had elapsed from the time of the apostles, before the doctrine or existence of a univi»rsal bishop was thought of, and that the office was not instituted till the year G06, But when I have proved this, I have worked only one question. Any one may take up the doc- trine of transubstantiiition, the worship of images, purgatory, (a doc- trine more ancii^nt hovvnvcr, than citlicr the (J reek or Roman church,) and every other peculiar doctrine of the Roman Catholic church, and prove that not one of them is to be found in the divine book, nor in the records of the church. What, let me now ask, is the great point in my first proposition 1 To provf that tlio Roman Catholic church is not "the rfiother and mis- tress" of all churches ; but a sect, in the full import of that word ; and if that be not now proved, I kimw not what can be proved. I admit the subject is capable of much more extensive developement ; hut we think it iifillu^r nercssary nor ex|)edient to be more diffuse. "Will l\\v presiding moderator please read my first proposition ] [Here proposition No. 1. was read by lin; moderator.] say then she is not the holy, apostolic, catholic church, as she pre- tends to bo ; for in proving her to be a sect, I prove her to be not ratho- lic, nor apontolic ; because the true apostolic clinrch catuiot be called a sect. To prove lier to be a sect is to |)rove her not Catholic, therefore, nor apostolic. What remains now 1 Even on the roncessidn of my opponent, she is not the Calhalic church ; for ho admits, that the (ireek church differed from her only in a few non-essential matters. On that 48 DEBATi: ON TUB admission, if he admits that persons are saved in the Greek church ; she must be a part of the church of Ciirist ; for with him, there is no salvation out of theciuirch. In the next place my ])roposition says ' she is not Italy.'' I am im- pelled by a sense of duty, and not by any unkind feelings towards such of my fellow citizens as belong to that community, to attempt to prove that the church of Home is not holy. 1 would not heedlessly or need- lessly offend against the feelings of an Indian, a Hindoo, or a Pagan, in his sincere devotions, how absurd soever they niigiitbe. Much less would I wound any one that professes the christian religion under any form; but in serving my contemporaries, in riideeming my pledge, it has become necessary to investigate the grand pretensions of this fra- ternity, that exclusively arrogates to itself the title oiholy. Not to expatiate at (his time on the vices of the clergy and of the popes what the cardinals Barronius and BcUarmine have so fully noticed, and sometimes specially detailed, I shall take a single text from Bellar- mine, De. Eccl. lib. 3. c. 7. which avows a doctrine that must for ever make the Roman church unholy. It is expressed in these words: — " Wicked men, infidels ami reprobates remaining in the public profession of the Romish church are true nienibers of the body of Ciirist." How then can we admit that she is holy'? Again : it must be ad- mitted that the great mass of all those who die in the faitli and profes- sion of the Catholic doctrines are not strictly holy ; for why then should they have to pass through the fires of purgatory ? But again ; in her own Testament (if she have a Testament. The gentleman may, indeed tell us his church has no English Testament ; for she never owned but the Vulgate. She never gave to her people, with approbation a French, or English, or any vernacular Testament. The Rhemish Testament is, however, published by the authority of a portion of the church ; and from it we can find the doctrine of Bellar- mine explicitly taught in the notes appended, by the same authority which gave the Testament) in her own Testament, I repeat it, on John XV. 1. these Roman annotators say : — " Every branch in me, &r." Christ hath some branches in his body mystical that be fruitless; therefore, ill livers also inav be members of Ciirist's church.'" "Ill livers''' (mark it) " may be members." This is repeatedly sta- ted in various places, and as I understand, avowed by ail that commu- nity, as the true doctrine of the church. " 111 livers,'''' wicked men, in- fidels, reprobates, vicious characters, those guilty of crimes of every enormity and color, may then continue members of the Roman church, while they acknowledge the pope and the priesthood, and make profes- sion of faith in the Catholic church ; she therefore counts within her fold 150.000,000 of souls, as my opponent staled in this city in October last. All that happen to be born in Catholic countries, infidels, athe- ists, and all, are enrolled in her communion. Her gates are wide as the human race. It is all church and no world with her. Tiic lusts of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, are found in her communion. The Roman Catholics in the United States are probably the best body of Catholics in the world. I mean those who are native citizens. But visit Old Spain or New Spain, Porlug-al, Italy, Austria, Fran<;e, or Can- ada, where Catholicism is the established religion ; and then ask whe- ther holiness be a distinguishing attribute of the depraved and degraded B03IAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 49 onllions who call themselves Roman Catholics! This with me is no very pleasant theme, and I will not extend my remarks on this point by unnecessary details. I have said enough to prove the allegata in my first proposition, and to show that the church of Rome is a sect and not ^ the holy, apostolic church of Christ, as she proudly and exclusively pretends. I am willing io submit these documents to the severest in- vestigation ; and if other arguments and facts are called for,.! will only add, we have them at command. My learned opponent seems to imagine that when 1 fix the birth day of the Roman Catholic church, on the 16th day of July 1054, I must admit that the church from which she separated was the true and uncor- Tupted church of Christ ; but this is what logicians call a nonsequitur. It does not follow. The gentleman seems to reason as if it were inva- riable that when one sect separates from another, the body from which it separates, must necessarily be the true church. This is not logical. A new sect may spring from the bosom of the worst sect on earth ; but does this prove that the mother sect has piety, character, or author- ity ? Neither does it follow that in the year 1054 the Greek church, though the mother or sister of the Roman, was the true church of Christ, When it becomes necessary, I may show that both the Greek and Ro- man schisms had long before 1054, been separate from the apostolic church. Protestants have all concealed too much in every age and period of this controversy. Even now there is a morbid sensibility upon this subject among some, lest we should make Christ's church too indepen- dent of the pope's church. ' In reproaching the mother church,' say they, " you reproach us, also." In one of the periodicals of this morning it was intimated that the fates and fortunes of some Protestant party are involved in the pending controversy. Be not afraid of the insinuations of such political alarm- ists. I stand here as a Protestant, not as a Baptist, or Methodist, or Episcopalian ; but to defend Protestantism. I am not afraid to meet any antagonist on these premises. In advocating the great cardinal principles of Protestantism, I feel that I stand upon a rock. There is nothing in hazard. I am sorry to see this sort of sensibility manifest- ed. Can the truth suffer from discussion 1 In the mean time I will proceed to the second proposition, which will much illustrate and confirm the argument already offered in proof of the first. These great points so embrace one another, and are so in- timately allied, that none of them can be fully demonstrated without re- ference to the others. "Prop. II. Her notionof Apostolic Succcfgion is without any Tuundation in the Bible, in reason, or in iVirl ; an imposition of the most injurious ronscquen- CM, built upon unscriptural and anti-scriptural traditions, resting wholly upon the opinions of intcrrstetl and fuftible men." Before I heard that the bishop intended to meet me in debate, I had resolved to deliver a scries of lecttires, on the whole pretensions of the Roman f'hurch, in the following order: 1st her aposlolicity, 2nd anti- quity, 3rd infallibility, Itli Buprnmacy, .'itii ratlmlicity, fith unity, and 7th sanctity. These seven great topics, I intended to discuss at full length. Each involving the others, none of them is so isolated as to be susceptible of an independent and separate developement. The very term apoiioliciiy involves uniiquily: hence, we find her pretending E 7 50 DEBATE 0:V TUB to trace her descent, by regular steps, back to Peter, who, she asserts, was the first bishop of Rome. " Only those that can derive their lineage from the apostles are the heirs of the apostles: and consequently they alone can claim a right to the scriptures, to the administration of the sacraments, or any share in the pastoral ministry. It i« their proper inheritance which tliey have received from the apostles, and the apostles from Christ. 'As mj- father hath sent me, even so I send you.'" John XX. 21. [Grounds of Cath. Doc. p. 17. This is the doctrine of the creed of pope Pius iv. and a more glaring assumption is not easily imagined. This church, however, delights in assumption. She assumes that Jesus Christ did establish a church of all nations, to be ruled by a sort of generalissimo, or universal head, who was to be his vicar on earth ; by virtue of whose ecclesi- astical power she assumes for him political power ; for his logic is, that Jesus Christ's vicar must represent his. master in all things, in his political as well as his ecclesiastical power. And as Christ himself possesses all authority in heaven and on earth, she assumes that the pope his vicar ought to be the fountain of all power : that by him kings should reign, and princes decree justice. After having thus as- sumed, that Christ did establish such a kingdom and headship on earth, that he did constitute the office of a vicar for himself and of a prince of the apostles ; in tiie second place, she assumes that this headship was given to Peter, that Christ gave the whole church and the apostles themselves in charge to Peter; that he gave him absolute control over the bishops, pastors and laity ; and in the third place, to complete the climax of assumptions, she assumes that Christ established a suc- cessorship to Peter throughout all ages. On this triple assumption rests the colossal empire of the papacy. Now, as to the nature of the apostolical office be it observed with brevity, that it was essentially incommunicable. Holy writ recogni- zes but three orders of apostles, and none of them had lineal succes- sors. Jesus Christ, the apostle of God the Father, was thejirst. He is called in the New Testament, " the Jpostle and high priest of the christian profession." It is not necessary to prove that he could have no successor. Second, the twelve apostles, who were apostles of Christ, as he was the apostle of God. In John xvii. he says, "As my Father made me his apostle, so I make you my apostles." These then being personal attendants on the Messiah, could have no successors. Third, Apostles sent out by particular churches, on special errands. These are called in the New Testament ii IAN CATHOLIC BELIGION. 53 the authority of Greek and Latin fathers, that is to say, the most au- thentic testimony of the first ages, to show that with Rome was the primacy of all the churches. This, at once, upsets all that he has said. He says the first seven councils were Greek; and that therefore the Greek church had the preeminence. But, I ask, who convoked those councils ■? Who approved them ■? Who sanctioned their canons, and gave throughout the entire church .the force of law to their decisions? Who guarded them against errors, and set them right when they were going, or had gone astray'? It was the pope. I have already said, that Sylvester, hishop of Rome, aware of the danger that menaced the faith in the east, convoked the great council of Nice — that the emperor Constantino, the ruler of the east and west, of Rome and of Constantinople, the man, consequently, upon whom as chief magis- trate of the Roman empire it devolved, afforded the necessary facilities to the various bishops to come to the council. Again, who presided as legate of the pope 1 Osius of Cordova, in Spain, a western man, assisted, as is and has been customary, by two inferior ecclesiastics. The jealous Greeks beheld all this, and surely they would not have permitted Rome thus to assume the supremacy, if her right to it had not been universally admitted since the days of her founder St. Peter. Is it not the most splendid proof of the correctness of my argument? The strongest evidence that could be desired of the discomfiture of ray adversary? I thought to have seen a more powerful display of logic from the strong and disciplined mind of my friend Mr. C; but 1 attributed the poverty of his argument to indisposition on his part, or to the weak- ness of his cause. Well, another reason is stated, to prove the supremacy of the Greek church, viz. : that the questions discussed in these councils were of Greek origin. Is it then to be wondered at, that as almost every error in the old church originated in Greece, it should be there corrected ? that the remedy should be applied where the disease existed ? The Greeks were at all times a curious, inquisitive, restless people. The passion for disputation displayed in the schools of the philosophers was, as by contagion, communicated to many of the professors of Christianity. But the manner in whicli it operated upon the one and the other was essentially different. With the philosopher such ques- tions were objects of understanding only, subjects of speculation; whereon the ingenuity of a minute mind might employ or waste itself. But with the christian thoy were matters of truth and falsehood, of belief or disbelief, and he felt assured that his eternal interests would be influenced if not decided by his choice. As soon as the copious language of Greece was vaguely applied to the ilefinilion of spiritual things, and the explanation of heavenly mysteries, the field of conten- tion seemed to be removed from earth to air, where the foot found nothing stable (nothing like the rock of Rome — new and striking proof of its necessity) to rest upon ; where argumrnts were easily eluded, and wiicre the space, in which to fly and rally, was infinite. Add to this the nature and genius of the disputants; for l/ic oripin of tliese dinputcs muij hi: traced vilhnut avi/ iTciplinu In llic rcntln^n imagina- tions of the. Kaxl. The violent temperament of the orientals, as it was highly adapted to the reception of religious im])re3sions, and admitted them with fervor and earnestness, intermingled, so closely, passion E 2 54 DEBATE ON THE •with piety, as scarcely to conceive them separable. The natural ardor of their feelings was not abated by the natural subtilty of their under- standing, which was sharpened in the schools of Egypt; and when this latter began to be occupied by inquiries in which the former were so deeply engaged, it was to be expected that many extravagances would follow, Vid. Waddington, p. 92. Yet, because it was in the east that the heresies in the ancient day of the church commenced, and in the east the councils met to correct those heresies, the Greek church must therefore have been the true church ! Such is my friend's argument ! and it is now plain, that a feebler, a more inconclusive, and a more irrational one, he could scarce- ly have advanced before this enlightened assembly. But what is still more remarkable, did not these very councils, these Greek councils, establish by their own acts, and these of the most solemn and authentic character, the supremacy of the Roman seel Did they not solicit the pope's approbation of their decrees, and acknowledge that without his sanction their proceedings were void of effect 1 He says that the emperor presided. I have already answered that the emperor did not preside. He distinctly acknowledged the spiritual to be independent of the temporal power, he alleged that he pretended to no right to preside. He knew that God never told the emperors, his predecessors, to preside over the deliberations of his church. The constitution of that church had been established three hundred years before Constantine became a proselyte to Christianity. It is unheard of that a temporal monarch ever presided over the deliberations of the church, or ruled in ecclesiastical matters. At least we catholics submit to no such dictation — such a confusion of things divine and human — such an anomaly ! I am sorry it is allowed in England. In that coun- try even a woman may be, for a woman has been, the head of the church, as in the instance of queen Elizabeth ; nay, a little child, as in the case of Edward. It is contrary to reason, to scripture, to human rights and divine ordinances, that such as these should presume in any situations, to give or withhold authority to the ministry, to preach the gospel of Christ, or to dispense the mysteries of God. It outrages every feeling of sanctity, it degrades, it vilifies the priesthood, to see bishops and archbishops kneeling at the feet of women and boys, and praying them to grant a license to preach. My friend has charged me with making professions of respect for Episcopalians and Episcopal methodists, &c., but do I suppress the truth, and do I fail to censure them where they too are wrong. My friend has gratuitously presented himself before this assembly as the champion of Protestantism; and I have shown that he is, if at all, but little less opposed than I am to the denominations I have named, on the vital point of orders and a called and sent ministry. He would amuse them with an equivocal defence of their principles to-day, and then present them with his own views in theology — with Campbell- ism, baptized Protestantism, — [Here the moderators called Bishop Purcell to order.] My friend, learnedly, (and I give him credit for it,) showed how it came that there were so many errors and questionable doctrines in the Greek church. I have stated the causes, humanly speaking, of the errors. It is then, an undisputed fact, that they were more numerous in the Greek than in the Roman church ; that the Roman church was ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 55 Comparatively free from theni. But he has plainiy misconceived the inference to be drawn from the fact ; and it is this : that as Rome was the primary see, the centre of unity, the mother and mistress of all the churches, God watched over her with peculiar care, and pre- served her from the errors and heresies that proved infinitely more fatal than the pagan persecutions, to the churches of the east. While they were distracted, the Koman church was united in faith ; while they were in danger of breaking to pieces the edifice of faith, she was consolidated, herself, and laboring to consolidate them under one creed. If any thing did prolong the gospel life in the east, it was the authority of Rome. By her was the doctrine of the Savior vindicated, and kept pure from the foul admixture, the contamination of heresy. By her were Arianism, Nestorianism, Eutychianism, Monotholism, and a hundred other novelties, the spurious progeny of dangerous opinions in the east, successively condemned. And now, having disposed of the argument which appears in the van of the gentleman's remarks, I will go on with a question of fact, to which he has again referred, touching the word Catholic. He says that it is not found in the New Testament. Admitting that it is not in the body of the canon, which I did not contend for, yet it is prefixed to some of the epistles, and as old, if not older, as a word belonging to the household of faith, than they are. He said the word Y^xBoKmn (catholtUe) was prefixed to the Epistle of James in the year 1549, by Robert Stephens, or Robert Etienne, by which name that famous French printer is better known — about 300 years ago. Yes, and I will show you that here again his learning is at fault, that to the 300 years must be added a thousand more, and then that the origin of the word is coeval with Christianity. Before quoting the testimony of St. Gregory Nazianzen, a writer ofthe 4th century, I will observe, that seven of the epistles found in the Catholic or Protestant Testaments, are call- ed catholic, or canonical, as not having been addressed to any particu lar church, or person, if we except the 2d and 3d of St. John, but to all the churches. Five of these epistles, viz. that of St. James, the 2d of St. Peter, the 2d and 3d of St. Joim, the epistle of St. Jude, as also the epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews, and the Apocalypse, or book of Revelation of .St. John, were doubted of, and not always and every where received in the three first ages, till the canon and catalogue of the books of scripture were determined by the authority ofthe Catho- lic church, the supreme judge of all controversies in matters of faith and religion, according to the appointment of our Savior, Christ, ex- pressed in many places in the holy scriptures. These I have men- tioned were certainly, for some time, doubted of; they arc still doubt- ed of by sonic of llie late reformers. liUther, the great doctor ofthe reformation, is not ashamed to say, that this epistio of St. James, is no belter than straw, and univorlhi/ an apostle. Speaking of these epis- tles, then, Gregory Nazianzen, at that early period, uses the word Cath- olic, and designates them i>y that natn<; : " T.»Sii«( iviiSi!, Ti ««i Kiri^ i>.«o-Tt(. Did they only cost out a vague r«proac)i,or had the emperor really listened to some obscure teacher of Ihojc ancit nt Gnostics 7 62 DEBATE ON THE people, who had the right, selected themselves a new ruler, like a true lover of peace and friend of established order, conijratulated Phocas on his election, and used tiie language of scripture, be it observed, in liis letter, because anarchy was at an end, and an orthodox and gener- ous prince substituted on the throne of C. P. for a tyrant, a miser, and a suspected Marcionite heretic. Mauritius may have died penitent, but he reigned without love for his subjects. We were spoken to of the president of the U. S. He has the same power and authority as Washington had while the constitution of the country endures. And as long as the constitution of the church en- dures, the successors of Peter have the authority of Peter. If there was ever to come a time, when the true church was to fail, Jesus Christ was bound by his wisdom and love to foretell it. If it was his intention to forsake the church, and if the power and authorities of all the regularly constituted orders were to fail, he never should have given it the promise of perpetual e;idurance, and the precise period, and all the different circumstances of its defection should have been more clearly and emphatically revealed, than any other event in the scrip- ture. It is needless to add that such defection is not foretold ; but on the contrary it is repeatedly declared by the Son of God, that his church should stand forever, that bis Holy Spirit should abide with it all days, that the gates of Hell should not prevail against it. What is the meaning of the words "the gates of Hell shall not prevail against if?" In the east, laws were enacted, justice administered, and the sages and people assembled for deliberation at the gates of the cities. Hence the expression denotes, wisdom, subtlety, malice. Again, when a city was invaded by a hostile army, the hottest fighting was around its gates. In them and around them, were all the energies of the conflicting hosts put forth — and on the issue of the battle was sus- pended a nation's weal or woe. Thus by the gates of Hell are clearly meant, all the craft and power of Hell, the malice of heresy and er- ror, the force and violence of persecution. All these shall rage around the church in vain, for Christ is in the citadel, and his Holy Spirit is the sentinel that guards its outposts and defences from being overthrown by error. But he says that the apostles had all power given to them — grant it — but what was the nature of that power? what was its ex- tent ? It was a power to teach all nations. The weapon of their war- fare was not carnal but spiriti^al ; " for our wrestling,'* says St. Paul, Ephes. VI. 12. "is not against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places." " Behold," says Christ, " I send you as lambs in the midst of wolves. Carry not with you scrip nor stafT, &c. Be not solicitous for the morrow, what you shall eat, or wherewithal you shall be clothed. Behold the lilies of the field, they BOW not, neither do they spin — and yet your Heavenly Father clotheth them — careth for them — how much more ye, &,c." By patience they were to run towards the fight proposed to them, and by patience they tri- umphed over their persecutors. The pope, should occasion require, viiW show himself the faithful imitator of these heroic models. Were he stript to-morrow of all external, temporal power whatever, and a poor wanderer among the mountains of the moon in Abyssinia, he would have no less power, and would be, for aught I know, no less respected, than he is at present. His chief authority is, thank God, koma:* catholic religion. 63 such as this world can neither give nor take away. It was given for the salvation of the people of God, and as lonjr as there is a soul to be saved, a sheep to be brouorht back to the fold, or a spiritual conquest achieved for the glory of Christ, and the praise of his grace, so long shall that power survive; when all else decays, itself, amidst vicissi- tudes unchanged, shall flourish in immortal youth. For our sakes, in this distant province of creation, and at this late age, as well as for those who saw the Word made flesh conversing among men, was this commission given and this authority conferred. Our souls were no less dear to Christ than were those of the first be- lievers of glad tidings — and Cincinnati was the rival of Jerusalem in the Savior's love ! With him there was no exception of persons — neither past nor future. He provided for every casualty which he foreknew should happen in the lapse of ages — he anticipated every favorable or adverse circumstance that should afiect the condition of his church, and with divine wisdom he adapted its constitutions to the peculiar exigencies of every age and nation and individual believer, until W3 reach "the consummation of the world." He sent his apos- tles with power to ordain faithful men, who should in their turn be fit to teach others. This is the charge that St. Paul repeated to Titus, and thus has the succession of apostolic teachers been continued from nation to nation, and from age to age, the church gaining in one region of the earth what she had lost in another, renewing her youth like the eagles, increasing her members, and daily transmitting to the bright realms of heavenly glory innumerable multitudes of her children of every clime and tongue, and peculiarity of social government or manners. The apostles exercised various functions — I admit it. But they substituted the deacons to wait on tables, and distribute the alms, so do their successors ; Christ gave them powers adequate to every emergency. It has been wrongly asserted, that Moses had no successor. Joshua was, in one important branch, his successor, for it devolved on him to lead the people into tlie land of promise, and without this consummation, the ministry of Moses would have been in vain ; and there are Joshuas now whoso oflice it is to lead the people to their spiritual Canaan — and as Cod obeyed the voice of Joshua, in commanding the sun to stand still, so he now obeys the voice of his priests making suppli- cation for his people. Here is an obvious analogy between the old and the nev.- covenants. My friend argues that, liecause Moses had no successor, Peter could have none, and the apostles none; l)ut it is clear that Moses had a successor. All that Moses arcompiislicd wmild have been incomplete without a succession of ministry to carry on tlio work of Cnd in favor of his people, Israel. This, Kusebius beauti- fully establishes, p. 40. So by the same analogy, it is necessary that the succession of an apostolic priosihood hIioiiM be continued forllic car- rying on of the christian dispf-nsation, and be transmitted ddWii frnni or n. eration of spiritual guides to generation, until they shall have coiKhiitcd all the people of Cod to the true land of promise, where I trust we shall all meet, and cease to dispute, as we now do, like little children, at the imminent risk of neglecting the weigliiier points of ibe law. For myself, I am heartily siek o\' such interiniiialde rontrntion. Hero would I stop and Kufi"er the matter to end without anoliier word, if iho ■ad necessity was not imposed upon mo of defending the impugned 64 DEBATE ON THE tenets of my church, and giving with my voice the testimony which, with the divine assistance, 1 should not hesitate to seal with my blood, to the truths of the Roman Catholic faith. From the discharge of this duty, no true believer, still more no minister of God, should shrink ; and it is worthy of notice that, with all the love and humility of St. Paul, he should have warned his disciple Timothy, and still more the body of the faithful, against associating with "heretics." I never use this word, as it is now so harshly understood, to designate those who differ from me in religion ; but I know not how any human being is to determine without the aid of a competent tribunal, who are heretics, and who are not; for we cannot look into the heart. I am told that an English divine was accustomed humorously to de- fine these terms in this way. "Orthodoxy is my doxy and heterodoxy is yours." But seriously, what being on earth can look into the secrets of the heart? Who was to determine when heresy occurred 1 That it existed in the early days of the church none can doubt. The apostles denounced it. They delivered its authors to Satan (of whom St. Paul says, are Hymeneus and Alexander whom I have delivered to Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme. 1st Tim. 1. 20.) The apostles did not suffer their disciples to make this discrimination for themselves, in defiance of the express word of God. They did not allow every man to assert the right of private judgment on scripture, which they taught was of no "private interpretation." 2 Peter, 1. 20. The very form " understanding thisfirsV exceedingly strengthens the text. Divisions will ever exist. They are, unfortunately, as nahii-al to depraved man, as vice; and but little, if at all less fatal. '■'■There were also false prophets among the people,'''' says St. Peter, 2d Ep. xi, 1, even as there shall he among you lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition, and again v. 10 and 12, " They fear not to bring in sects, blaspheming those things that they know not, promising their disciples liberty, whereas they themselves are the slaves of corruption." These are fountains without water, clouds tossed with whirlwinds, or as St. Jude says, V. 13, "raging waves of the sea, foaming out of their own confusion, wandering stars to whom the storm of darkness is re- served for ever." Who would trust his safety in a perilous voyage to an unskilful pilot ? W^ho would risk the horrors of the deep without chart or compass 1 Has God abandoned his children so far as to leave them a prey to every innovator, every wolf in sheep's clothing? Is there no ark of safety for man, while the waters of error overspread the earth ? Yes, my friends, there is. It is the church. That ark alone can save the world. "Whosoever," says St. .John, 2d Ep. 9, 10, "revolteth and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house, nor say to him, ' God speed you.' For he that sayeth 'God speed you,' communicatelh with his wicked works." This admonition, we understand to be directed against false religions and false teachers. It does not forbid charity, which we owe to all men, and particularly the erring; for whom, we are taught it to he our duty to pray, that they may happily come to the knowledge of truth. I confess that, for my part, I cannot practise this doctrine literally, nor refuse to salute one who differs from me in faith. I retain my own convictions and eschew his errors. The apostles did differently, R05IAN CATHOLIC RELtGION". 65 and who will presume to say, they were not more enlightened than we T When St. John met Cerinthus (who denied the divinity of Christ) in the baths of Ephesus, he ran out saying that he was afraid the baths would fall upon him. And when his disciple St. Polycarp met Mar- cion, in the streets of Rome, he refused to salute him. " Do you not know me V said Marcion. " 1 do know you," replied Polycarp, " to be the oldest son of the Devil." This shows the dread of religious inno- vators entertained by the apostles of Christ and by their disciples, the . 239. Again : "'I'he Paiijician teachers," says Gibbon, "were distinguished only by their scriptural names, by llie modest title of their fi'How pilgrims ; by the austerity of their lives, their zinl and knowledge, and the credit of some extraordinary gift of the Holy Spirit, liulthey were incapable of desiring, or at least, of ob- luining the wealth and honors of the Catholic prelacy. Sucri anti-christian pride thev strongly censured." — Id. ib. p. 240. I mifrht read almost to the same effect from Waddington and Da Pin. True tiiey arc called /icralics by tliose who call themselves Ca- tholic anil us heretics; but what does this prove? Until the appearance of the Waldenses and Alhigenses, these Pro- testants continued to oppose the church of nations in the east, and in the west, until at one time they claimed the title of Catholic. We read of hundreds of bishops attending the different councils in which they met to oppose the violent assaults of their enemies. It is sometimes difficult to say which were the more numerous party, those in communion with the Cathari, or Puritans, sometimes called Novatians, sometimes Donatists, sometimes Paulicians, sometimes Waldenses; but always, in fact, Protestants. The spirit of true religfion seems to have fled from Rome from the first appearance of the Novatians. The first schism at Rome acknow- ledged and recorded by the Roman Catholic historians, is that which occurred at the election of Cornelius over Novatus. Hence Novatus is called the first anti-pope. Du Pin and Barronius amply testify of the violence l)y which St. Peter's chnir was often filled with a vicar after this schism. In the election of Damasus many were killed in the churches of Rome. One hundred and thirty four persons, beaten to death by clubs, were carried out of a single house at this election. Had the Iloly Spirit any thing to do in thus filling the chair of St. Pe- ter with a vicar of Christ! Is the church which permits such things and W'hich has been sustained by such means, the true church of God?' Is the person thus elected; the supreme head of Christ's church — the proper vicar of Christ? ! May we not then say that the spirit of God on that day, had departed from Rome? And may we not add, from the documents before us, that if there be any truth in history^ we have found a succession of witnesses for the ancient faith against Rome, from the days of the first schism till the present hour ? There is but another point in the speech of my opponent, to which I ■will now respond. I called on him to explain the difference between the claim of the title of pope, or universal father, (as St. Gregory op- posed it,) and the same claim as now maintained by the head of the church. The name pope, indeed, has in modern times, much changed its meaning; for once it was applied to all bishops, and is now ap- plied to every priest in the Greek church. 13ut when has the title "universal father," been changed? lie alluded, in reply, to the schism between the Greek church and the Roman church. The Greek church, it seems, would not allow that the ordinances of religion with- out their sanction, were validly administered. Is not that the very plea of Rome at this hour? Docs she not say, that the bishops and clergy of the English church are all laymen, because that church se- parated from the Roman church ; and that all the authority she had from her has been since revoked by the authority that gave it ? How SOMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION, 69 often are we told that the pope has the power of resuming all authority- given him — that he can create, and afterwards destroy 1 that whatever ecclesiastical power he gives, he can take away ; and that therefore all heretics excommunicated and anathematized have no power left to perform the ordinances of religion'? The ground upon which the gen- tleman stands as to his defence of the authority of the pope, is precise- ly the ground of Gregory's opposition to the title, as claimed by Boni- face iii. if I can understand his attempt to explain it. But I must advert, before I sit down, to a single point on which I touched in my speech of this morning, viz. that of the councils. The gentleman asks, did not Sylvester the pope preside in the first general council by his legate 1 I affirm that he cannot show documents to prove that fact. — ^Nay, let him show, if he can, that the first seven councils were called by the bishops of Rome, or that his legates were there to preside. What would the gentleman prove by the fact, if it be a fact, that a Roman bishop presided over one of these councils 1 That, therefore, they were Roman councils 1 How would such logic pass with us with regard to the house of representatives ] His argument runs thus : Mr. Henry Clay was once speaker of that house, Mr. Clay is from Ken- tucky, therefore, the house of representatives were all Kentuckians f This would be exactly the pith of the logic we have heard. My opponent admits the history of the first seven councils which I have given to be correct: but explains it by asserting that all the busi- ness was eastern. But fkcre were western heresies, as well as eastern, and western business as well as eastern transacted in these councils. I therefore object to his exposition of that matter. It would have been impolitic on his exposition to call together eastern men to decide upon eastern heresies. They ought to have sent western men, who would have been more impartial judges. But he has not yet adduced one document, showing that these councils were called for such purpo- ses, or that the cast only was concerned in these questions. On the jjrefix " Catholic" to the epistles, the gentleman did not hear me, or did not apprehend my moaning. The argument is not a- bout its anlifjuitij hnl hs authority! Ho has not proved, and cannot prove tiiat it was so prefixed in the first ages, nor that it was ever so applied by any inspired writer. Having brought no documents to prove this, his reasoning is wholly irrelevant. But you have been treated, my friends, to a feast from the " Baptist Banner,''^ one of the party cpbemerals opposed to reformation. Un- fortunately for the cause of religion, every age has produced a crop of these special phadiTS for party tcnols. 5lany such a banner was un- furled against Martin Lutlicr, .folin Calvin, Joim Wesley and all re- formers : for they were all iierelics and controversialists. Indeed there never was a good man on earlli who was not a controversialist. From the days of Abel and Noah till the present hour, the friends of truth have been hcrrtiral and controversial. But what has the B.ijjlist ban- ner to do with ihc present points at issue ? Is the gentleman so hard f reused as to form such alliances, to deliver himself or cause from ruin ? trust he will either keep, or be kept to the rjuestion in drhale, and leave Protestants to settle their own controversies. — [Time ex- pired.] 70 DEBATE ON THE Twelve o'clock, M. Bishop Torcell rises— I thought we should be placed under considerable obligations to my friend, for putting his finger upon the historic page that records the day and date of the apostacy of the Roman Catholic church from the true and holy Apostolic church, with so much precision. But now we are adjourned back nearly 1000 years, and yet nothing more definite than a " some time about tlie year 250 !" Some time about ! He does not tell us whether it was in one year, or another, that the church began to be corrupt. It was some time about, and so on. About this time, it seems, the Novatians separated from the church — well, Paul foresaw that such events would occur in the church's history — he foresaw that " ravenous wolves would enter the fold ;" that dissensions would exist, at all successive periods, to the end of time— that every day new heretics would start up, who would deny the truth, introduce false doctrine, and trouble the people of God. The Novatians were one of these sects — and what did they teach 1 Why the most revolt- ing and horrible doctrines ; among others, the doctrine that a convert to Christianity, who, in times of peril and temptation, nay even when compelled by physical force, should forsake his creed, could never be restored, no matter how sincerely penitent. Who that feels his frailty and knows that his heart in an evil hour might stray from duty, does not revolt at such a doctrine, that for one offence would cut him off forever ! God dealt not so with Adam, nor Christ with Peter, when at the voice of a woman, and in an evil hour, even his strong heart failed him. He admitted him to mercy, received him back to his bosom, and made him the rock of his church. But if all heretics are right, and this among the number — if the church was wrong in separating herself from these men — if it is her duty to say to the upholder of false doctrine " all hail," you are as free from error, as incorrupt and immaculate, as we are, come partake with us, we are of one communion; the rule should, according to the gentleman's logic, work both ways, and Rome has as good a right as anyother to be called the church of Christ. On the other hand, if the Novatians were right, as he says they were, in excluding others, the church was right in excluding them. The speech of heretics, St. Paul tells us, 2d Tim. ii. 17, spreadeth like a cancer; he elsewhere says, that evil communication corrupts good manners ; and the Pagans were not insensible to the wisdom of the distich — "Priiicipiis ot)sta ; sero medicina paratur "Cum maid per lon^as iiivaluere moras." My friend must have forgotten his argument of this morning, when he said that the church of the living God should include none but the pure and holy. If this be true, we must all give it up ; for who is holy ? Which of us can lay his hand upon his heart and say I am without sinl No, we are only holy in acknowledging our sinfulness and guilt in the sight of God, with humility and prayer. " If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us! If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to clear us from all iniquity." St. John, Ep. If such be the gentleman's re- quisitions, there can be no church of Christ in this erring world. There is none pure from defilement, says Job, and all are included as the ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 71 objects of divine displeasure, from which only the blood of Christ, with faith, repentance and good works, can save us. If the gentleman insists on applying a test which would require absolute perfection to enable us to endure it, there is no such holiness, that I am aware of, exhibited in this probationary state. My friend may feel a proud con- sciousness that he is a happy instance of its existence, but for my part, I cannot, I should not think it safe to lay the flattering unction to my soul. I would advise no man to do so, while the great St. Paul com- mands us to work out our salvation with fear and trembling; and tells us, he chastised his own body, lest while he preached to others he himself " should become a reprobate," 1st. Cor. ix. 27. It is our duty to acknowledge that we are frail and sinful mortals even like the rest of men. Establish a contrary rule, and pride digs one abyss after another beneath our feet, and there will not be left one virtuous feeling, one sound principle left upon which we can take our stand to make a last appeal to heaven for mercy ! When Christ empowered the church to throw her nets into the sea of human life, as the apostles did into the lake, she gathered into it fishes, both good and bad ; when the nets are hauled ashore, the good fish will be selected and the bad thrown back into the sea. So will it be at the end of the world. The angels of God will come forth and select the elect from the reprobate — they will gather the wheat into the garner, but the tares they will burn with unquenchable fire. The Catholic church with a consciousness of man's true condition in this life, and a liberality which does her honor, and which, all agree, ought to belong to the fold of Christ, permits all to join in her religious festivals and exterior communion who profess the same faith, and are willing to submit to her decisions as her children. But mark the distinction between the body and the soul of the church, all who profess the true faith, assist at the same religious exercises and obey the same pastors, belong to the body of the church and are therefore numbered among her children ; but to faith and exterior com- munion of which alone man can take cognizance, must be added hope and love and grace with God, that we may belong to the soul of the ciiurch. Of the latter the church does not undertake to decide. This she leaves to CJod who alone can see the heart. She, herself, judges not the in- scrutable thinj/s of the s[)irit of a man, but contents herself with know- ing and teaching that nothing can escape the piercing and all-seeing eye of God, who will render to every man according to his works, on that day when the hope of the hypocrite shall perish. Hence, as long as one of her members disqualifies not himself for the comniniiion of the faillifiil by flagrant impiety, notorious depravity, or scandalous excess, she rejects iiim not; but like that charity of which St. Paul speaks, let Cor. xiii. "is patient, is kind, thinketh no evil, rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rrjoiceth with the truth, bclievelh all things, hopeth all things, endurcth all things, with modesty admonihbing men, if per- adventurc God may give them repentance." The gentleman quoted from VVaddiiiglon the, history of the Nova- tiang. He says, they continued, how long I know not, but till ! (forget not the word,) till they merged in the sect of Donatists. The expressive word lill is enough. There is nosueh fatal and teriuinnling word in Catholic history. The (Catholic church is universal, and not sectarian. Jt is perjielual in duration, antAN CATHOLIC BELIOION. 75 Three o'clock, P. M. Mr. Camtbeix rises — I may have mistaken in ascribing to the bishop of Rome what waa done by the bishop of Constantinople, in reference to the personal consecration of the successor of Mauritius ; but this does not aflect the justice of my remark, or invalidate my reasoning : and I think my worthy friend apprehends this, inasmuch as the consecration was approved and sustained by Gregory. I read those documents at the same time, and may have confounded them, but we shall hear them again and see how much is either gained or lost by the admission. " As a subject and a christian, it was t!ie duty of Gregory to acquiesce in the establislied government, but the joyl'iil applause with which he salutes the for- tune of the assassin, has sullied with iiulerMe disgrace the cliaracler of the saint. The successor of the apositlcs might have inculcated with decent firm- ness the guilt of blood, and the necessity of repentance : he is content to cele- brate the deliverance of tlie people and the fall of the oppressor; to rejoice that the piety and benignity of Pnocas have been raised by providence to the impe- rial throne; to pray that his hands may be strengthened against all his onemifs; and to express a wish, perhaps a prophecy, that, after a long and triumphant reign, he may be transferred from a temporal to an everlasting kingdom."* — Gibbon Hist. Dec. and Fall Rom. Emp. vol. viii. ;). 211. Now this, if I mistake not, amounts in substance to my affirmation. Gregory approved the usur])ation, and sanctioned the induction into office of a man who had wrested tlic throne from the legitimate master, and who was both a munierer and a usurper. I could wish that my oj)ponent would select some of the great points of my argument in his replies, and form an issue with me. Were this piece of history blotted out of existence, what loss to the main argu- ment 1 These are merely incidental and minor matters — illustrations rather than proofs, and leave the great facts as they were. I must, however, briefly glance at some other little things before I resume my argument. The gentleman's next remark was, " that Joshua was the successor of Moses." True it is, that every man is in one sense sncreseor to some one who preceded liiin. Uut Moses was, for a time, captain, prophet, priest, and king of Jeshurun. Joshua, however, merely com- manded the people, and divided the land of Canaan among tliem. This did not Moses: Moses accomplished all that he was appointed to do. He needed no successor in the peculiar work assigned him. They were both extraordinary offices. Moses was a law-giver, and Joshua a savior. The law was given to the people by Moses: Joshua gave them an inheritance. Neither of them, in the nature of things, could have a successor in the same office, for its duties wcri; all di.sciiargcd. I was pleased tolienrlhe genlh'innn admit all tiiat I said conccriiing the Novatians. 'I'hey had one fault wiiich v,e bolli allow — lliey were too severe jn one branch of discipline — they could never receive those who had grievously fallen — no repentance would obtain re-admission if tiie penitent had very flagrantly sinned. The occa.sion was this: • Gre^or. 1. x'l. rpi«t. 38, indict, vi. Benignilatcm vestKn pictatis ad impu- rialc fnntl^um pervenisnc gnudemus. I/rtcntur culi c-t exultet terra, et do veitrin benignis acliliui univem.'e reipublicu? popiiluR nunc usque vein nicnter afllictun hiliircurot, 07, !i9H.) Cardiual Barroniui juitiCci the pope at the ex- oense of the I'ullen rniperor. 78 DEBATE ON THE In the interim of the Pa^an persecutions, many new converts were added to the churches. 5y and by, when the storm of persecution arose, they withdrew and fell away : but when a calm ensued, they sought to be restored to the church. Tlie Novatians opposed their restoration ; the other party contended for it. The Puritans got vexed with the frequent indulgences and backslidings of such professors; and this occasioned that extreme on their part, which drew down upon them many anathemas from the other party. They had other objec- tions besides this against the opposing party; but this was sufficient for a division. I was sorry to hear the gentleman excusing the church for embrac- ing in its bosom men of every sort of wickedness. He spoke with great feeling and eloquence upon the subject of calling ourselves holy, &c. We admit that there is no man free from all pollution, whose- heart is always and only pure. But what has this to do with the openly wicked and profane — rcprohates of the deepest dye 1 Ought the church to open her doors as wide as the human race, and admit every human being without discrimination'? Is there no medium? He quoted the parable of the tares and wheat. It is true, the Savior commanded to let the tares and wheat grow together till harvest : but the gentleman assumed that it was spoken of the diurch. I admit the doctrine, as applied to the world. " The Jield is the world,'''' not the church, said the Savior. Does this excuse ns for tolerating reprobates in the bosom of the church? "You are not of this world," says the Savior to his disciples — " My kingdom is not of this world," " Come out from among them, and separate yourselves, and I will receive you, says the Almighty Father. What concord has Christ with Belial, or he that believeth with an iniidelT" As to the"continuation of the Novatians iill the Donatists, and the Donatists iill the Paulicians," &c. my friend emphasizes the word /?'//, as if those witnesses for Christ had died away when some new sect arose. The fact is, that when some great leader arose, his name was imposed upon all that associated with him; and different leaders, in various parts of the world, moved great masses of professors, who were essentially the same people; and when they became acquainted with each other, they coalesced under one great profession, variously nicknamed by the opposite party. So are the Lutherans, Calvinists, Wesleyans, Cameronians, &c. of ojir own time. Sorry was I to hear my liberal antagonist compare the Protestant sects to the psalmist's description of a prosperous wicked man — ^'I saw," says he, "the wicked great in power, spread himself like a green bay tree: he passed away; yea, he was not. . I sought him, and he could not be found." I do not know how his Episcopalian friends ■will thank him for this compliment. I hav^ no doubt in this he was sincere, for the Romanists often bewailed the long life of Elizabeth, because, under her reign, a new race of Protestants was born and edu- cated, and alienated from the Roman hierarchy, who were proof against all the machinations of Rome. They hoped that the Protestant Epis- copalians would, like the green bay tree of David, (emblem of the prosperous wicked,) have withered away, and been reabsorbed by the mother church ; but for once the application failed, and the wicked Protestants have for three centuries grown and increased, in de- spite of all the policy and effort of Rome, and are now in expectation E0:iL4.X CATHOLIC KELIGION. 77 of seeing the same 37th psalm verified in the fates of Roman Catho- licism. Every sect and individual, as I said before, is passive in re- ceiving a name. Sectarian names are generally given in the way of reproach ; thus the disciples were first called christians at Antioch, most probably in derision ; yet it was a very proper name. Call us what you please, however, it does not change nature or race. The disciples of Christ are the same race, call them Christians, Nazarenes, Galileans, Novatians, Donatists, Paulicians, Waldenses, Albigenses, Protestants, or what you please. A variety of designation affects not the fact which we allege ; we can find an unbroken series of Protes- tants — a regular succession of those who protested against the corrup- tions of the Roman church, and endeavored to hold fast the faith once delivered to the saints, from the first schism in the year 250, A. D. to the present day ; and you may apply to them what description or de- signation you please. The gentleman spoke of these sects as waves passing by while the true church remained like a wall, immoveable and unchangeable. History refuses him her suffrage in this assumption : for it deposes that she has changed, in whole, or in part, her tenets and her disci- pline, no less than eighteen times in all — that is, once, at least for every general council. She is the mutable immutable church, con- tending for uniformity in faith and variety of discipline. My opponent has quoted the apostles' creed. Du Pin, and a learn- ed host prove that the apostles never wrote it. The doctrine contained in it, I admit is apostolic. And it is worthy of remark that like all old creeds, it states /ac/s ,- whereas modern creeds are human exposi- tions of doctrines. For my own part, I can adopt every article of that creed, ex animo ,• except, perhaps, I would change one expression, and say that ' I believe in a Catholic churcii.' I believe that there does exist such a thing as a truly Catholic church of Christ. But as for human creeds, I make no such platforms a bond of union among christians. We, like the Romanists, differ about church discipline among ourselves : but all the Protestant world believes this ' apostles' creed,' as it is called ; and are as uniform in this faith as the " mother church" herself. I was sorry to hear the election of the pope, the pretended vicar of Christ, as respects riots, and blows, and carnage, compared to that of the president of the United States, and to have the excesses com- plained of in Rome, excused on the (rround, that sometimes we have mobs, and perliaps a flight on a presidential election. Is the jiresiden- tial chair of sudi dignity and sanctity as that of tiie vicar of Christi ! And is a riot or murder no more incongruous in the one case than in the other 1 We opine, that he wiio holds that exalted station should come into it without blood. And yet in all these political elections, since the Protestant rcforiaatioii, llioro is nothing to e(|nal half the up- roar, and tumult, and murder, that happened in filling tiie ciiair of St. Peter, at the conflict between Damasus and Ursinus, not to mention a second, ('an it be compared to the election of the prcsidcnU so as to transfer to the one the language which is pcrliucnt to the oilier 1 As, for example, " Take heed to the flock over which the Holy Si-iiut has placed you!" The gentleman is glad that his church is to liberal as to authorize o 2 78 DEBATE ON THE every sort of baptism, even that performed by heretics, provided only the proper name be pronounced ! This is certainly a modern excess of liberality. If I am rightly informed, his predecessor, in this very charge, was not so liberal as he — in one case, at least, which occurred at Portsmouth in this state. There were two members of the Episco- pal church," one of the parties the son of an Episcopalian minister, de- sirous of entering into matrimony. Bishop Fenwick desired to know of what party they were, and on learning that they were Episcopalians, refused to marry them, unless previously baptized by himself. There may be many other instances of liie same sort, certainly, in former times there were many, and so far as they prove that the church is not immutable, are hopeful indications of the possibility of reform. But this is not the question before us. We are not discussing baptism, or the eucharist, or any of the " seven sacraments," or any ordinance of the church. Will the gentleman inform us whether his church regards the administration of the eucharist, or any other of her seven sacra- ments valid, unless at the hand of those whom she authorizes to min- nister them. Let him not wave the question by a reference to a prac- tice which he knows can be explained on other principles. I shall not now stop to dispute about Sylvester and the council of Nice : but shall resume my general argument where 1 left off. All agree that if primacy or supremacy reside in the church at all, it must reside in some person. If Jesus Christ intended to make Peter the prince of apostles, the vicar of Christ; the title will prove it clear- ly. If this headship, on the other hand, was not given to Peter; none can derive it from him by succession. Was Peter invested with this authority 1 If not, none can pretend to it as his successors. Tho whole question rests on this. My learned opponent cannot show that Peter ever had such an office. He affirms, indeed, that Peter was su- perior to the rest of the apostles : but does he show in what respect ? How many kinds of superiority might there have been in his case 1 I will answer for him and say that there are, at least,/our. 1st. of age, 2nd. of talents, 3d. of character, and 4th. of office. These are clearly marked in holy writ, and fixed in society. Admit then that Peter is head of the list; can he decide which of these four has placed him first. The bishop asserts that he was first in office. But how can he take this for granted, when there are three other ways in which Peter might be at the head 1 Is this the reasoning that logic or Catholicism sanctions or requires 1 I would request the gentleman to tell us, how he knows which of these four sorts of superiority to ascribe to Peter ! He assumes one, and is bold in asserting the Catholic doctrine of a supreme head of the church on this assumption. Peter may have been the oldest, or the first called of all the apostles : or his character or talents may have given him a decided superiority ; why then assume one, to the exclu- sion of the others. 'J'he greatest empires have been built on the most bold assumptions. But never was there a more baseless monarchy in the annals of time than that of papal Rome. I wish my opponent would for once assume, or take up some one of these grand points, on which his church rests, and not waste his time in fighting about sha- dows or peccadillos. Let him come at once to the great principles of the debate. I challenge him to show cause, why he assumes for Peter a supremacy of office, rather than of age, of talent, or of character ; KOMAN CATHOLIC RKLIUION. 79 any one of which is much more feasible and probable than that which he has begged. — [Time expired.] Half past 3 o'clock, P. M. BlStiop PtfRCELL ilses — 1 was far from charging Mr. C. with a Wilful dereliction of the truth, when he stated, what he now confesses to be untrue, that Gregory crowned Phocas. The imputed motive was very base, but he now sees that it was not the pope's. I attribute this extraordinary mis- take, on the part of my friend, to the fact of his having been too apt to believe that every thing written against Catholics must be true, and to his memory's not having been lately refreshed in his early readings. But it is due to the public that he should apologize for having, through want of care on a matter of so much importance, fallen into so very serious a mistake in what was calculated so deeply to injure the truth. He should first have inquired whether all he said was true. I repeat, then, that Gregory did not crown Phocas at all, much less for the express purpose of eliciting from the gratitude of the sover- eign an acknowledgment of his " papal supremacy" for this recognition was as old as Christianity. Order was restored in Constantinople. He then sent him words of compliment on his accession. It is contrary to the rules of sound argument to presume that Gregory approved of the circumstances which led to the change of dynasty. Napoleon grasped the Iron crown of Italy, from the altar and put it on his brow, for he acknowledged no Donor thereof but his sword. So would Phocas, very probably have done with the crown of C, whatever Gre- gory might have thought of the act. Moreover, Phocas did not hurl Mauritius from the throne. Mauritius abdicated, and the people, not the bishop of C. P. made Phocas king, in the place of Mauritius, amiser, and a tyrant ; and Gregory rejoiced, not at the disturbances but at the restoration of order. My friend now treats these matters as light, and incidental. It was he himself wiio made then principals, by the manner in which he introduced them. Me was arguing a knotty point, tlie manrifr in which Uom(> came to " assume" her high pre- rogative over the cliurcli. The plain, scriptural truth, that she came to it by divine appointment was before his eyes, but he would not see it. Ih It to be wondered at tliat he saw in history what was not there ! I will say no more on the subject of Joshua. Kusebius confirms, p. 4G, what I have said. The object of the ministry of the old or of the new law, of the corning of ('hrist, of the shedding of his blood, and all the in- stitutions of his religion, was not the setting up of a tabernacle in the wil- derness, or the crossing of the .Jordan, or the surveying of a piece of land and dividing it among a few tribes, but the salvation of man- kind, without any exception, or distinction of age, or clime; and this (freat work of regeneration and redeinjition is just as important now, and will continue so while there arc iMMonxAi, souls to he en- lightened and saved, as it was in the days of iIk; apostles. Their office must remain, and their successors are charged with it. The bishops and their assistant brethren watch over the safety of the fold, and the soverri[rn pontiff sees that they ;ui(l tlicir flocks prrsevcre in ufiity. He watches over all. Mr. ('. persists in saying that the NovaliauK, Donatists, Paulicians &c. &c. agreed in doctrine, and may be considered as the Catholic 80 DEBATE ON THE church. I have already refuted this theory, but here is Protestant tea* timony again to destroy it, and I hope we shall not waste any more time on it, for it is too absurd. " No heretic," says Waddington, p. 154, " was as likely as the Donatist to lay claim to the name Ca- tholic ; yet even a Donatist, while he maintained that the true spirit and purity were alone perpetuated in his own communion, would scarce- ly have affirmed that that was bona fide the universal church, which did not extend bcyotid the shores of Jlfrica, and ivhich had not the via- jority even there^ Speaking of the sects in Dauphine and other errorists condemned at Arras in 1025, the same author says, (p. 554) "It is proper to mention what these opinions really were, which were con- demned at Arras, lest it should be supposed that they were at variance only with the Roman Catholic church, and strictly in accordance with apostolic truth." " It was asserted that the sacrament of baptism was useless and of no efficacy to salvation, (what does Mr. C. think of this 1) that the sacrament of the Lord's supper was equally unne- cessary. — It appears that the objections of the heretics on this point went beyond the mere denial of the change of substance — that the sacred orders of the ministry were not of divine institution — that penance was altogether inefficacious — that marriage in general was contrary to the evangelical and apostolical laws — that saint-worship is to be confined to the apostles and martyrs, &c. &c. so mixed and various is the substance of those opinions to which learned writers on this subject appeal with so much satisfaction." Again, " they were all taint- ed more or less deeply by the poison of Manichaesism : and since it is our object to establish a connexion, with the primitive church, we shall scarcely attain it through those whose fundamental principle was un- equivocally rejected by that church, as irrational and impious." 555. Mosheim says, 1st vol. p. 328, "Among the sects that troubled the Latin church, this century, (the 12th) the principal place is due to the Cathari, or Catharists, whom we have had already occasion to mention. This numerous faction, leaving their first residence, which was in Bulgaria, spread themselves throughout almost all the European provinces, where they occasioned much tumult and disorder. Their religion resembled the doctrine of the Manicheans and Gnostics, on which account they commonly received the denomination of the former, though they differed in many respects from the genuine primitive Manicheans. They all indeed, agreed in the following points of doc- trine, viz. that matter was the source of all evil ; that the creator of this WDrld was a being distinct from the supreme deity ; that Christ was neither clothed with a real body, nor could be properly said to have been born, or to have seen death ; that human bodies were the production of the evil principle, and were extinguished without the prospect of a new life. They treated with the utmost contempt all the books of the Old Testament, but expressed a high degree of ven- eration for the New." Speaking of the Waldenses, p. 332, Mosheim says, " They committed the government of the cliurch to bishops, presbyters and deacons, but they deemed it absolutely necessary that all these orders should resemble exactly the apostles of the divine Savior, and be like them illiterate, &c. &c. The laity were divided into two classes, one of which contained the perfect and the other the imperfect christians." Of another sect, the Pasaginians, Mosheim says, p. 333, "They circumcised their followers, and held that the law of Moses, in every thing but sacrifice, was obligatory upon Chris- ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 81 tians.'''' What the same Protestant historian says of the brethren of the free spirit is too horrid. It is the foulest of the many foul pages he has stained with the history of sects, "They maintained that the believer could not sin, let his conduct be ever so horrible and atro- cious." The celebrated Ziska, not a Roman Catholic inquisitor, but the austere general of the Hussites, another sect of Protestants, fall- ing upon this miserable sect in 1421, "put some to the sword and condemned the rest to the flames." Mosheim, 428. " A sect of fana- tics called Caputiati, infested Moravia and Burgundy, the diocese of Auxerre, and several other parts of France, in all which places they excited much disturbance among the people. They declared publicly that their purpose was, to level all distinctions, to abrogate magistra- cy, to remove all subordination among mankind, and to restore that primitive liberty, that natural equality, which were the inestimable privileges of the first mortals." Mosheim, p. 333. Luther repeatedly declared that he stood alone, that all antiquity was against him. Here are startling facts and no less startling admissions by sound Protes- tants. Will my friend insult this enlightened assembly by making up a monster-church, a very chimera, of all these sects, and give modern Protestants all the honors present and prospective of being the tail of the beast? I would counsel him not to dream of doing so, and ihem to look out for more reputable religious ancestors. But the Roman Catholic church has changed at least in discipline. Grant it. And what of that? Is it not the very nature of discipline that it must be modified by times, places, peculiarities of nations and other circumstances, in order to be adapted to the wants of man in all the varieties of his being ] Truth is unsusceptible of change. Like God it is always the same. But the form of the dress of the clergy, the color of the wine to be used at mass, days of fasting and abstinence, and of public meetings for prayer and certain unessential rites in the ad- ministration of the sacramj'.nts, may be changed. The constitution of the church should possess this clement of good government. She has the power to make these changes, and she has made them as the wants of her children seemed to require. But the doctrine is invariable. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but, of it, not an iota shall change. As to Ihe deaths oecasionnd iti the election of a pope, I ask agam, what has that to do with tlic constitutionality of the office 1 The popo did not shiy those people- According to the gentleman's theory, the president of this union would have to answer for the blood, if any, flpilled at his election. I am astonished that such arguments should be repeated. I can say wilii certainty of my venerable ])redecessor that he would not have pursued tlu^ course, he did, if the story ho true, if he had had reasou to believe the individuals had never been baptized — ami if any two or mop' young jjcople will ecMue to me, who have bet-n rightly baptized in I'rotcstant (;omnuniions, 1 warrant them, if there bi; no other obstiicles, they shall be quickly bound together in the indissoluble bondH of matrimony. I am perfectly willing to revert to the point of the supremacy of St. Peter and the continuance of his high authority in his successors, for it is a cardinal dortriiic It solves a tlioiisjuid lesser points of (lilhculty, and I am happy to argue it ;iir;iin from the New 'Ceslanienl, from church history, from reason. I have already quoted scri|)ture for tho dogma of the supremacy of Peter — " upon this rock will I build my church." My friend does not like to approach that rock,— He takes 11 82 DEBATi: OX Tin: care to keep shy of it. I also quoted " feed my Iambs, — feed my sheep" — "To thee I will pivc tliekeys of the kinjrdom of lieaven," — " Blessed art thou, Simon," — and " when thou art anointed confirm thy brethren," &c. All these texts, and more, did I quote, and the gentle- man has had my aulliority before him. I shall now strengthen my quotation from the fathers, adducing overwhelming facts to prove that Peter was bishop of Home and that the bishops of that see have ever been regarded in the Catholic church as his successors. Many of my hearers may suppose that this matter is buried in the night of time — that history is either silent, or not sufficiently clear upon it. But when they hear the s))lendid tostimonios I am going to adduce, they will change their minds on this subject, and confess that, from time immemorial, in the very earliest ages, the church was precisely the same, in its faith, its sacraments, its hierarchy, its clergy, &c. &c. that the Catholic church is at the present day. (Here bishop Purcell held up the map of the succession of popes from the first, Peter him- self, down to the present pontiff, Gregory XVI. ; the names of all the most eminent men in the church ; the date of the establishment of the gospel in the various countries of the world, the origin and authors of the various heresies and schisms, their condemnation by general coun- cils, or synods, &c. &c.) let any other exhibit such an array ! Christ Jesus said to his disciples " go, teach all nations." They went ! they preached every where, and the world believed ! before their death they ordained others whose names are here faithfully re- corded. Hero is the ecclesiastical history of Eusebius, and according to the pun upon his name (you see by us) you will see by him what a flood of light irradiates this subject. Eusebius wrote in the 4th century, and to remove all suspicion I bring before you the translation of his history by a Protestant minister, C. F. Cruse, A. M. Assistant Professor of the university of Pennsylvania, 2d. edition, revised and corrected by the author. [The reading was interrupted by the half hour's expiring.*] Four o^cIock, P. M. Mr. Cami'bici.l rises — Is the original Greek of Irenaeus extant ? [The bishop intimates, ' iVb.'] Of what authority, then, is the version from which he reads 1 I have never read in Irenaeus nor seen quoted from him a warrant for the assumption that Peter was ever bishop of Rome ? But of this again^ After raising such a dust as the gentleman has about Phocas and Gregory, it has become necessary for me to re-stale my argument. Gregory the great wrote to ^lauritius, requesting him to induce John, bishop of Constantinople, to give up his claim to the title of universal father. Mauritius would not do it. Gregory the great, is supposed by all antiquity to have harbored a grudge, or bad feeling towards Mauritius, because of this; and therefore his exultation at his death, and his easy recognition of the pretensions of his murderer, which acquiescence, on his part, secured the compliance of Phocas with the wishes of Gregory, and secured to his successors the title of universal patriarch, or pope — [Bishop Purcell here observed, that Phocas was not the murderer of Mauritius.] * The extract referred to will be found in a subsequent speech. ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGIOX. 83 Very well, I have the authority of Gibbon for my assertion — not for saying that he killed him by his own hands : but by his authority, as he lays to Phocas the blood of Mauritius and his seven children, on the principle, qui facit per alterum, facit per se. He does himself what he does by an other. The said Phocas did afterwards, Barronius being a faithful witness, give the title of universal bishop to Boniface, Gregory's successor, and who can infer any thing else from all the circumstances, than I have done ? ! 1 thought the gentleman was about to produce authority to prove that Sylvester did call the council of Nice. This, I again assert he cannot do. If he think he can, let him attempt it, and we will show he cannot. We, however, do assert on the authority of Eusebius, and all ancient history, that Constantino the great did call the council of Nice ; and we affirm on equal authority, that the pope's legate did not preside in that council. Whether Hosios did is problematical. It is inferred from the fact of his being present : but there is no historic authority for it. But all this is very subordinate and of little value. The whole question rests upon the itujuiry, TF/tat office had Peter? What was his ecclesiastical power and patronage 1 Was Peter tlie prince of the apostles? Was he made the vicar of Christ ? Ay, this is the question ! It requires explicit — nay, positive scripture authori- ty — whei% is it ] The gentleman offers several passages to this point. I shall exa- mine the prominent texts, and begin with the 16th chapter of Mat- thew. — I read from Griesbach's Greek Testament. In this chapter, Christ asks his disciples the question, "Who do men say tliat I ami" and afterwards asks them, " But who say ye that I am ?" and Peter answered : "Thou art tlio Christ, the Son of the living God ;" "and Jesus answered and said unto him, blessed are you, Simon Barjona, for flesh and blood has not revealed it to you, but my Father, who is in heaven : and I say also to you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my congregation and the gates of hades sliall not prevail against it." Matth. xvi. 13 — 18. " Upon this rock :" was Peter tliis rock 1 The words sound much alike, {Fetms and Peira). Let us examine the passage. One of the internal evidences of the truth of the apostolic writings is, that each writer has something peculiar to himself. So has every s|)eaker and teacher, that has appeared amongst men. Jesus Christ liimself had his peculiar characteristics. One of his peculiarities most clearly marked by the four evangelists is, that he consecrated every scene and circumstance and topic of conversation to religion or morality. A few examples, out of many that might be given, must suffice. When standing by the sea of (lalilee, he says to the fishermen, who were casting their nets into the sea: "follow me, and I will m;ike you Juhem of men." At the well of Samaria, he says to a Samaritan wom- an, from whom he asked a drink — " Whoev(;r .shall drink of this wa- ter shall thirst again ; but whoever drinks of the water tliiit I shall give liirn, shall never thirst : but it shall be in him a well of water sprintring up to eternal life." While with his disciples in the temple, and seeing the sheep going up to be sacrificed, he says : " My sheep hear my voice, and they follow me ;" and he speaks of himself as the true shepherd, who lays down his life for his sheep. Mis dis- ciples having forgotlcn to l;iKo bread, when embarking on the lake, and when talking about it, he took occasion to say : " Bewaro of tlio 84 DEBATE O.-y THE leavon of the Pharisees." When on Mount Olivet, annong the vines and olives, he says, " I am the true vine, and my Father is the vine- dresser." And when lookinfj at the temple, he says: "Destroy this temple, and 1 will huild it in tiiree days." — So in the passage before us. He asks his diseijjles an all important question, in reply to which, one of them who happens to Ix; named Fcter, utters the great truth, upon which he is to found his cliurch forever : " Thou art the Christ, (the Messiah), the Son of the living (ion." Jesus turns to him and says : " Thou art stone, and upon this rock (on this great truth which flesh and blood has not revealed to thee), I will build my church." Ej try riergsf, Kit et; t-jlvt-.i th rme/^ — " ei su Petros, kai epi iaute ie peira'^ — ' You are Peter and upon this pclra,^ strikes the ear of a Grecian as ' thou art stone and upon this roc/r,' strikes the ear of an English man ; and as we have seen is a part of the Savior's peculiarity. The construction of language requires that the word " //n's" should refer to something antecedent different from thoa, or you. They are different in person and in case. But not only does the Savior's peculiar cKaracteristics, and the change of person from " thou'''' the personal, to this the demonstrative, fix the sense : but other considerations of freat moment, forbid any other interpretation. For let me ask, why id .Tesus propound the question to his apostles — why did he elicit from them so great a truth, if in the solemn declaration which imme- diately follows, he meant to pass by that truth and allude to Peter alone. This would be a solecism unprecedented — a case unparalleled. The whole authority of the christian religion and all its excellency is embraced in the radical ideas whicii had been for the first time pro-? nounced by the lips of man. There are, indeed, but three care person, 2nd the oflice, and 3rd the character of Christ. Beyond these — person office and character, what conception can mortals have of our Redeemer % Peter mouthed of these, the two which gave value to the third — The person and the mission of Jesus. He was the first mortal who, dis- tinctly and intelligibly avowed the faith, in the person and mission of Jesus the Nazarene, upon which the empire of the ransomed race shall stand forever. This is the good confession spoken by Jesus himself at the hazard of his life, before Pontius Pilate, of which Paul speaks in terms of the highest admiration. This great truth deservedly stands forward under the bold meta- phor of the Rock. But still more creditable to this truth, — not " flesh and blood," but the Heavenly I'^alher first uttered it from Heaven. On the banks of the Jordan, when Jesus had honored his Father in his baptism, his Father honored him ; and was it not worthy to be honor- ed b)' proclaiming it from the opening sky, " This is my Son, the be- loved in ichont J dc/ight,^^ while the descending Dove marked him out? A Pagan poet said, "3.(-v.r introdufu- a (iod unless upon nn occasion vvoi-tljy of Ijiiii;"* And who feels not the propriety of such an introduction here ; for when first spoken, no angel in heaven, nor man on earth, could intro- duce the Messiah, in his proper person, but his own Father. Now, * Nee Deus intersit nisi dignus vindice uodus — Inciderit. — //or. ROMAN CATHOLIC HELIGIOX. 85 because Peter was the first to utter it, Jesus says to him : " I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." What a controversy there has been about these keys. Jesus gave them to Peter alone — not to him, his heirs, and successors forever ! I was denoted as heterodox a few years since, because I alleged that the opening of the reign or kingdom of hiaven, by Peter to Jews and Gentiles, was the true exposition of the kfeys. But I am glad to see this view promulged now from various reputable sources, even from Trinity College, Dublin. Peter opened the kingdom of heaven on the day of Pentecost, and by divulging a secret never told to that day, viz. " Let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made that Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ." This annunciation of the coronation, or Chrisiing, that is anointing of Je- sus king and governor of the universe, was a new revelation made on the Pentecostian morn by Peter. He declared remission on that day to 3000 souls, and introduced them into the kingdom of the Messiah. Again, when it pleased God to visit the Gentiles in the family of Cornelius, a Roman centurion ; an angel sent from heaven, command- ed him to send for Peter to Joppa to come and tell him and his rela- tions '•^wofds by which himself and his friends might be saved." He did so. He sent, and Peter came. Why thus call upon Peter'? Be- cause Christ's gifts are without repentance. He had given him the keys. He therefore must open the two-leaved gate, and introduce both Jews and Gentiles into the kingdom. This being once done, needs not to be repeated. The gates of heaven have not since been locked. There is no more use for the keys. Peter has them yet. He took them to heaven with him. He did not will them to any heir or successor. The popes are fighting for shadows. Heaven never trusted such gentry witli tlio keys. They miglit take into their heads to lock the lierotics out. 1 tliank God that he gave them to Peter, that Peter opened the gates of the kingdom of heaven to us all, and that as the popos cannot sluit Ihcm, we do not need them a second time. Peter will guard them, till he who has the key of David, who opens and nonf? can shut, will appear a soroiid time. Tluis we dis- pose rationally, and I think srripturally, of this grand text. 'I'hc next text upon which confidence is placed by my opponent, is Mhere Christ says to Peter, " Feed my sheep, feed my lambs." lianguage has no meaning but from the context. Every word serves to fix the meaning of its contextural associates. We. must read the 2lst chapter of John's Testimony, from the beginning, if we would correctly understand this |)asaage. The facts are : Peter and some of his brethren had returned to Cialilee, disconcerted and overwhelm- ed with the events of the day. They felt themselves destitute, forsa- ken, and in need. Whih; their master was with them he provided for them in some way. He eould say, when I sent yon witlnmt scrip or KlafT or monry, did you lack any thing] They answer( <1, no. Hut he was gone, and thi'y knew not what to do. in this distress, Peter says " I am ffoing a fishing," and the rest accompany him : but they toiled all night and caught nothing. In the morning they see the Sa- vior walking on the shore ; they know him not. He says to thoni, "Children, have yf)n any meati" Tliey answer, "no." He tells them to cast on the other side of the bark. They do so and take a large H 86 DEBATE ON THE Tmmber of fish. Peter, when he knew it was the Lord, girt his fish- erman's garment around him, leaped into the lake, and swam ashore. They dine together, and after they had eaten to satiety, Jesus says to Peter, "75o you love me more than these ?" My construction of these words is, "Do you love me more than these fish, or these victuals." He then says to Peter, " Feed my lambs :" and the fact before him and all the circumstances say, I will feed you. The bishop's construction is, "Do you love me more than these dis- ciples love mel" But how could Peter answer such a question -1 Was he omniscient to know how much his companions loved his mas- ter. In that case he would have said, "Lord I love thee, but I do not know how much my brethren love thee ; they also love thee, but I know not whether I love thee more than tliey do." But suppose he could have known, then I ask, was it comely to ask so invidious a question ? Would not they have felt themselves disparaged, if Peter had said, "Yes Lord, I love thee more than all my fellow apostles love thee!!!" Peter had erred. He had become discontented — .had forgotten his duty to his master, and had betaken himself to his former occupation of fishing, and induced the rest to join him. Christ asks him sol- emnlj', " Do you love me more than these fish, these boats", nets, ap- paratus, or these victuals, this worldly employment ] if so, cease to spend your time in providing food for yourself; but feed my sheep and lambs, and I will provide for you." Besides, he having caught nothing till the Master appeared, was a very striking lesson, which I presume Peter never forgot. I confess, I think the gentleman's inter- pretation of sheep as bishops, and lambs as laity, most singularly ar- bitrary and fantastic, and needs not a grave reply. So we dispose of the second grand text on which the church of Rome has leaned with so much confidence for so many ages. My learned opponent has not yet afforded us evidence for his as- sumption of official supremacy for Peter. These texts reach not the case. They do not institute a new office bestowed on Peter but are tokens of esteem, for reasons personal. Every privilege he received was on account of some personal pre-eminence, not because of an of- fice which he held. The canon law has decreed that a personal priv- ilege doth follow the person and is extinguished with the person. Now as all the honors vouchsafed Peter were in consequence of his promptness, courage, penitence, zeal, &c. they never can become the reasons of an hereditary office. His supremacy, or rather superiori- ty, or primacy, most naturally arose from his being one of the first, if not the first convert — the oldest of Christ's disciples ; because he was prompt, decided, courageous, zealous, ardent, and above all, he was a married man, had a wife and family. And although this fact might not comport with his being the fountain of papal authority, it obtain- ed him an honor above John the bachelor, and all the bachelors of that age !! Once more on this subject — let ipe ask, who made a more volunta- ry surrender of himself to his master — who more promptly fors6ok all that he had, than he — who, when his Lord asked, will ye also leave me, with more ardor said ; " Lord, to whom shall we go but to thee ; for thou hast the words of eternal life V Who more courageously, in the time of peril, drew his sword to defend his Master ] who, when ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGIOX. 87 the Savior foretold his own sufferings and indignities, more affection- ately and devotedly exclaimed, in the warmth of his heart, " Lord, it shall not be so done unto thee !" It is true that this ardor of disposition, this promptness, this deci- sion of character, sometimes betray their possessor into errors ; yet who will not say, give me the man of energy and decision, and ardor of character] John was meek as a dove; he was innocent and amia- ble as a lamb, and the Lord loved him ; but those bold and stern, and manly virtues he wanted, which gave so much interest to the charac- ter of Peter ; and so admirably fitted him to stand forward and fore- most, amongst his colleagues and fellow apostles. — [Time expired.] Half-past 4 o'clock, P. M. Bishop Purcell rises — Do you love me more than these JishU My brethren, if the subject were not too serious, I should call my friend's construction a fish story ! Jesus Christ said to Peter, " lovest thou me more than these T" js/ua his — what, if fish 1 {i^ovao') plus quam has. There is an end to all that argument. Mr. Campbell. That is the Latin version. Let us have the Greek. Bishop Purcell. The Greek is not more plain, nor will it prove your interpretation less revolting, less contrary to the obvious and more common interpretation of the text. Sad conclusion this, which my learned opponent reserved as his main reliance, for the last hour of the day ! And is it thus that he proves the church of Rome to be neither catholic, apostolic, nor holy, but an apostacy from the only true, holy and apostolic church of Christ 1 He is heartily welcome to the proselytes this argument may gain to his tottering cause. Let learned Protestants now claim their champion's services in the difficult task of interpreting the scripture — or let them, as I have pro- phesied they would do, repudiate his advocacy. The change of name from Simon to Peter, shows that Christ chose him to be, beyond the other apostles, a rncA-, or more firm, more con- stant, more immoveabi»' than they — and tliat forever — in the confession of his divinity, his real nresence with his church and all the other truths he had vonrhsafccl to reveal to thn world. A rock does not melt. — The winds may beat and the rains may fall, but the house built upon a rock will stand, not for a few years, but forever. And as the rork, in the physi<'al order loses not its nature, so neither do the promises of Christ lose their efficacy. "Thou art Peter, (or a rock) and on this rock, I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." .Mattiicw xvi. 18. A professor of Andovcr ('oilegc has i)ublished a volume, I think it is entitlfd "Elements of Sacred Criticism." I have examined this work, but my memory retains not the author's name, — perhajjs some of the learnfd gentlemen present may aid it by the suggestion — how- ever, he substantiates my interpretation, or ratbrr that of all ages, by incontrovertil)le argiimcnf. And I eoiifcss tlic Anieriran College has, in this instanee, a decided superiority, both in sound eriticism and or- thodoxy, over the "dumb sister," as the Knglish and Srotch universi- ties have invidiously, or faretiously, named Trinity College, Dublin. There is one plausible timonirii. it follown, if men will not contest tlie authority, or cull in <)ue»lion the veracity of sonic of the fairest characters, that the christian world reveres; it follows that from the «2 la DO DKUATE ON TIIF, time of St. Pt'ter to tlic time of Innoront, in the fifth rrntury, there existed ?n the sf o of Rome, an iniiiiterrupt. il cliaiii of jias-tors, and a continuation of an apostolic mission. The continuation of that .same apostuiic mis.-iion which Christ Jesus had imparted to St. Peter. Only he, can doubt tliis, whose incredulity doubts of every thing. And has the chain of Roman pastors, — for this is now the only point which we must investigate, — been continued and extended from the time of Innocent the first, to the present day; an interval, it is true, extremely long, and filled up with storms, and changes, and revolutions and great events? Yes, the chain has been continued and extended all this whole length of period; from Innocent, who consoled the great Chrj'sostom, under the persecution of an ambitious princess, to Fius the seventh, wlio himself is the heroic victim of the persecution of a re- lentless \ ictor. Indeed, the fact is so obvious, it is not even contested. It is conceded by tlie men, who are interested to deny it. To be assured of it, you need only to consult the political annuls of any considerable state, or to appeal in our historians to the mere tal^lets of chronology. You will find that all give to our Roman pontill's the same line and hngth of succession, which I here assign them. Their conduct has been always prominent; their influence always conspicuous. I'ew were the great events and transactions, in which, cither from a principle of piety, or sometimes of ambition, they did not bear a part. Yes, but if prompted by curiosity, you will give yourselves the trouble to con- sult the annals of the church, there you will trace, more distinctly still, the evi- dence of the truth, wliich I am novv establishing;. There attending to the occur- rences of each epoch, you will observe, that the helm which had been confided to the trust of Peter, is with the greatest regularity transferred from hand to hand; and with pious care, confided to the trust of each successor. You may mark the name, and read the character of each individual, who directed it, the date of the day when it was committed to his guidance; and the hour, almost, when he resigned. In short, admitting the accuracy of the lists which have been preserved by Irenneus, Tertullian, &c., you trace in the annals of the church, a clear, plain, and incontestible evidence of a line of Roman pontiffs, the succes- sors of St. Peter, during the long course of above eighteen hundred years. If tlie ancient fathers, in their times, and at the distance only of a few years, so triumphantly produced the list of these holy men, evincing by it the divinity of the church, and the apostolicity of the mission of its pastors, and by it confu- ting the novelty and clain)s of heresy; if Tertullian, impressed with tlie force of this argument, victoriously called out to the hosts of innovators, " sheiu us any thing like this. Unfold and shew us the origin of your churches ; shew us the list of your bishops, in regular order from tlie days of the apostles, succeeding to each other;" if he couJd say to them, " fVho are you? Whence is your origin de- rived? JVhat have you to do in my estate? lam the possessor. My posses- sionis ancient. I am the heir of the apostles." if he could say all this; and from this, after scarcely the lapse of two centuries and the succession of hardly a dozen pontitis, demonstrate the apostolicity of the church; with how much more reason and with how nmch more effect, might I, or any other Catholic, demonstrate its apoetolicity at present, at psesent when the continuance of Pe- ter's successors (ornis a chain, of above eighteen hundred years, and their num- ber fills up a list of above tivo hundred and fifty pontiffs? Oh! were only a Ter- tullian now, or an Austin, standing in the same situation in which I am placed before you, addressing you from this seat of truth and pressing the same argu- ment, which I do to day, upon your attention; and pressing it recommended by the circumstances which I have just referred to, how the thoughts would glow, and the words burn, with which the}' would convey the exultation of these feel- ings to j-ou! How the cause of truth would triumph in their eloquence! With what redoubled enthusiasm would they exclaim, " let heresy sheio any thing like this?" In reality, if the argument which these great men have employed to prove the apostolicity of the church, proved aught in their times, it certainly proves the same, and a great deal more, at present. To the thoughtful and the philosophic mind, there ia much, I have already ob- served, to admire in the stability of^ the church amid the fluctuation of human things. It is the same in regard to the long continuance of the successors of St. Peter. Wisdom and reason, when they consider it, are struck with wonder; and piety discovers in it the visible effect of an Almighty superintendance. The institutions of men soon perish. The modifications of human policy do not long ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 91 retain their forms. Nothing human is permanent. To contemplate, therefore, an order of pontifl's reaching the whole length of eighteen centuries unchanged, whilst every thing else was changing; uninterrupted, whilst all other institutions were perishing. — is a spectacle at once striking, awful, and impressive ; calculat- ed to inspire the protestant himself, if not with the conviction of its divinity, at least with a conviction of its wisdom ; with a respect for its strength ; with a veneration for its antiquity. Let only reason cast a look into the annals of time, or recall to its recollection the events and revolutions, which during the lapse of eighteen centuries, have taken place on the theatre of life. During that interval, in every kingdom of the civilized world, every government has changed its form ; every dynasty resigned its power : every empire sgnk to ruin. Rome itself, dur- ing It, has experienced in particular, a'll the vicissitudes of human instability : has been ruled alternately by Consuls, Kniperors. Kings and Exarchs : has been taken, plundered, sacked 'and reduced almost to a heap of ashes. In short, during it, every thing that is human and political,— the work of the power and ambition. of the wisdom and art of men, has either perished or undergone a variety of al- terations — Kingdoms, states, cities, monuments, laws, opinions, customs, here- sies. JVought but the succession of our pontifl's, and the institutions of our holy religion, have remained unaltered. These alone, amid the general revolution ; amid the storms of war ; the ravages of passion ; the conflicts of heresy, subsist undecayed and undecaying. They even subsist in spite of all those evils ; though assailed by the violence of persecution ; though combated by the machi- nations of passion ; though attacked by the artificesof error ; though assaulted by the combined efforts of vice, Satan aiid the world. Surely prejudice itself will own it, — a succession of Pastors thus perpetuated for eightten centuries, and per- petuated amid such obstacles, is not the efl'ect of chance, nor of earthly policy; not the creation of ambition, northe ofl'spring of worldly wisdom. The only method of accounting rationally for it, is to allow, that it is the result of a divine institution ; and the consequence of that assurance given by ourgreat Redeemer to his apostles, that he icould be u-ith them all days, to the end of the world; — or in other words, that it is the result and the iiroof of an apostolic mission. from the evidences of the apostolicity ot the church of Rome, is inferred the evidence of the apostolicity of the various other Catholic churches, which are disposed throughout the universe. In reality, they are all of them the parts of one whole ; the branches of one tree ; the streams of one fountain ; the rajs of one sun. They all form only one communion, whose centre and head is the church of Rome. Of these churches, some were established by the apostles themselves, and their immediate successors ;— some and a very considerable part, by the soccessors of St. Peter, the Roman pontiffs, who in each age have w i(h pi- ous zeal, deputed missionaries to preach the gospel in almost every region of the globe. Rutin every age, and in every region, the churches that were thus planted, vsere only considered ae apostolical, or as portions of the true church, from the evidence of their union with the church ot Rome. It is the remark of St. Jerome ; (hat no bishop was ever acknowledp^ed to he a lavful bishop, except in as much, as he was united in communion with the chair of SI. Filer." And why may I not adduce as another evidence of the apostolic mission of our pastors, the venerable subsistence of a multitude of other churches, which, without having lasted from the age, which saw the apostle;r to ins. rt it entire, here.] I close here. To-morrow is the sabbath of our God. Let us de- vote the remainder of the day to the preparation of our souls for its holy duties. MONDAY, January 16th, Half past ^ o'clock, A. M, RIr. Campbell rises — It is a trite and a true observation, that the material universe is re- solvable into a very few elementary principles. And not a iev; of our wisest philosophers supptjse that the time may yet come, in the pro- gress of chemical science, when material nature will be resolved into some two, or three rudimentary elements. The sciences, too, mental and moral, are all resolvable into a few great cardinal principles. The papal empire itself depends also upon a few points, indeed, up- on one great point, and thai relates to the office upon which the whole superstructtire rusts. The most fundamental question is not whether the apostle Peter was invested with the office of pope, or vicar of Christ; but rather lohelher there ever ivas such an office at all. On this question we have not proceeded in the most logical manner. I have been compelled to approach it at different times, and by different ave- nues. My opponent has not adverted to the rules of this discussion. I am compelled to lead, and he to follow. He can only lawfully reply to such matter as I introduce. But instead of replying to my argu- ments, already offered, he read you some dissertations upon succession to an office, not yet canvassed and established. This reading of for- eign discussions instead of replying to me is contrary to our rules and most illogical. I hope we shall have no more of it. What was read on Saturday afternoon on the question of succession is clearly irrele- vant. Before we contend about succession, the question is, What is to be succeeded to ? We have had seven presidents, and the succes- sion is indisputable; yai the office depends not upon the seven incum- bents, nor upon their rightful succession ; but upon what is written in the constitution — upon the positive and express institution of the office. If it is not found in the constitution, succession is of no virtue: however unbroken and orderly it may be, the present incumbent has no power. The grand question then is, Is there in the constitution of the Christian church, in the New Covenant, or last Testament, a chair of primacy, or superintendency? This is the logical and the cardinal question. On this single point rest all the fortunes of the papacy in an enlightened comnmnity. I wish all to perceive it, and I will pre- sent it in different forms. The first question is, Has Jesus Christ ap- pointed the office of pope? The second, Who was the first officer? Third, IVus there a succession ordained ? and fourth, Has that succession been preserved uncoriupt to the present day ? In this way our reason, or common sense, or logic arranges the matter; and in this way only can it be rationally and scripturally decided. With all men of sense, the controversy will hang on this point. A failure here is ruin to the ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGIOX. 93 cause. If this point cannot be proved, it is as useless to contest oth- ers, as it would be to finish a house that is built upon the ice. Strike off the head and the body perishes. Yet this capital point rests upon an inference ! How would an American like to be told that the office of president depended upon an inference 1 that there was no provision for it in the constitution — that it was inferred from twenty clauses, scattered here and there in as many sections'? Could it be possible, that the greatest office in this nation — the very head of this government, should rest on the construction of these clauses ; that there is no chapter in the constitution, expressly creating the office 1 Yet, this is precisely the case with the pope. The gentleman does not claim for him a po- sitive grant in the New Testament. He must acknowledge that there is no such office distinctly asserted — that it depends on the reasonings of fallible men to ferret it out. Here I must expose the nakedness of the land and sweep from the arena the dust of tradition, which blinds the eyes of implicit believers. It is said by the Romanists that a belief in the supremacy of the fiope is essential to salvation. Boniface VIII. decrees in his canon aw in the words following: " Moreover we declare, and say, and define, and pronounce to every human crealure, that it is altogether necessary to salvation to be subject to the Roman pontiir." It appears, if not pedantic, at least awkward to read Latin to an English audience. However, my learned opponent, so often sets me the example, that he will allow me to quote this important decree : " Subesse Romano Pontifici, omnis humana' crcalurce declaramus, dicimus, dcjinimxis, et prunimciamus omnino esse necessitate salutis." It is then solemnly decreed that a ^belief in, and submission to, the Roman pontiffis essential to salvation. Ought not, then, his authority to be as clearly pointed out in the Bible as the mission of Jesus Christ? for the person and mission and sacrifice of Christ are to us useless, without faith in the pope. Again, of what use is the Bible, without this belief; and especially, if so important a matter is so ob- scurely expressed in it as to rest upon a mere inference 1 Does the person and office of Christ depend on a mere inference 1 Is it not as- serted and re-asserted, a liundrcrl times by the voices of all the j)ro- phcts and apostles of both Testaments 1 In the Jewish economy, the high Priest was on earth : but in our economy he is in Heaven. There was truth in the type, and there must be truth in the anti-type. Yet every thing concerning that priesthood was positively and expressly ordained. The office, the officr-r, the succession, and tiic means of keeping the blood pure. For, No man dare "lake that office upon himself, but he that was called of God, as was Aaron." Aaron then was distinctly called to be a high priest. Now we argue that if wo had a high priest on earth imder our high Priest in heaven, and if salva- tion hang upon obedience to him : it ought to be as clear as that of Aaron. But in referenci! to the Old Testament priesthood, we find every thing distinctly and unefjuivocally stated, Kxodus xxviii. 1. "Take Aaron and his sons from among the children of Israel, that In- and they may minister to me in fhe pritist's office." Again, xl. I.'}. " And thou shalt sanctify Aaron and his sf)ns, that he may niinistcr to nic \n the priest's office; and their anointing ahnll surely lie an evcrlustin^ prie»t- hood Ihroughottt their generalioni." How often in the books of the 94 DEfiATE OS rttfi law, and in (he subsequent history of the Jews, as it is in 1 Chron. 23(! and 24th chapters, do we find the unequivocal institution and records of this priesthood ! But it is not only in a distinct and unequivocal call and consecra- tion, but in the subsequent care evinced in sustaining this appoint- ment, that we see the necessity of such a positive and express cove- nant and understanding. The rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, and the destruction, by a miraculous interposition, of themselves and of their company, together with two hundred and fifty princes of Israel, for seeking to invade the office, is another solemn attestation of the divine erection of this oflice, and the certain call of Aaron's family. Again : The appointment of God to select an almond rod for each tribe, and to inscribe the name of each of the twelve families upon those rods, every tribe's name upon a separate rod, and the miraculous buddingr and blossomino and almond-bearing of Aaron's rod, in the course of a single night, was another settlement of this matter, so spe- cial, supernatural, and divine, as to put it to rest for ever. Here we ought to read in full the 16th and 17th chapters of Numbers ; but we have only time to refer to them. Thus by a positive call, and two splendid and av; fully glorious miracles, was the office of the high priesthood established in Israel. And may we not ask, that if as Boniface has defined, and all Roman Catholics believe, ^that there is no salvation, but in the admission of the divine call of the popes of Rome ;^ ought not the institution of a new order to be as clearly pointed out, and sustained in the new law, as it was in the old ] ! But my opponent has to concede that there is no such positive or express institution of St. Peter's chair, nor of his call and consecra- tion, nor any law of succession whatever in the New Testament; and that it rests wholly upon inference. Now, if no man can take this honor upon himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron, where is the office and the authority of the popes of Rome 1 ! There is for it no such call. Or will my friend say that mere inference or assump- tion is a proper foundation for such a call and office? On Saturday evening I began the examination of the premises from which is inferred this high and responsible office ; and so far, I think, proved that he cannot even find a good logical inference for it. In Matthew xvi. we found no support to the idea that the church of Jesus Christ was to be built upon ilie flesh and blood and bones of Peter; neither upon his person nor office. We saw that every rule of gram- mar — that the construction of language forbade such a transition as was necessary to the hypothesis. To have addressed Peter in the second and third persons as both present and absent, in the same breath, is wholly unprecedented. To have spoken of him, and to him at one time, in one period, and on a matter so cardinal as making him the foundation of his church, is not to be admitted on the autho- rity of mere assumption, without a single case parallel in all holy writ to lay along side of it. The case in no rational point of view will endure such violence. Jesus asked for a confession, Peter gave it. The conversation turned upon that confession, and not upon Peter. The comment ought to have been upon the text, and not upon him that gave it. It was upon the text and not unon the preacher. ROMAN CATHOLIC Seligion. 95 We Protestants say that the church is founded on the thing con- fessed. Christ himself is, indeed, the rock ; hut fijruratively the truth which represents him. I was struck with astonishment when I heard my worthy opponent say, that Peter was the rock, and Christ only a stone in this spiritual temple ! [Bishop Purcell here explained, ' that he had said that Christ waa the corner stone which was to strengthen and give consistency to the foundation ; and Peter the rock which was to strengthen and give con- sistency to the superstructure.'] Mr. Campbell proceeded: Christ the corner stone! and Peter the rock ! ! Does this help the matter 1 What says 1 Cor. iii. " Other foundation can no man lay than what is already laid," — very Peter!! No, indeed; but Jesus Christ him- self is the corner stone, the rock, the foundation? Then Peter is but a slone, as his name imports. But there were eleven other stones of equal value : for, says the Holy Spirit, the church is built upon the foundation of the apostles — all the apostles; and of the prophets too! When, then, all these stones are at the foundation, and Christ the chief corner, where is the room for Peter the rock 1 But, we have other expressions that illustrate Matthew xvi. Look- ing at the temple one day, Jesus said to those before him, "Destroy this temple and I will build it again in three days." Were the per- sons he addressed in the second person and the temple the same thing 1 Here, then, are the persons addressed, the subject of conversation, and himself — you, (the addressed,) and the temple, (himself.) So have we Peter, his confession, and Christ the builder of the church, in the passage before us. They understood by his question that he spoke of his body; but his body was not himself: neither was the confession of Peter, Christ himself; nor Peter's person, the rock of ages. Surely the papal rock is not as our rock ; our enemies themselves being judges. Bat petros and petra sound alike, and therefore, though of different gender, case, and person, they must be identical ! Of the person and case we have said eno\igh, (for my friend has not attempted to refute it.) Of the difference in gender, he will tell us, that it was written in Syriac, and that the word signifying stone in that language is of no gender. This is gratuitous. He can produce no copy of Matthew in Syriac; the only authentic copy we have is that before me. It is the Greek version of Matthew : " 7'Aoit" is in the second person, and "//uV is in the third. I'ctros is masculine and I'ltra is feminine. It is impos- sible for langiiajTc to do more to prevent iiiislakc ; and he that would attempt to explain away these three — gender, person and case, is not subject to the laws of language, neither tnrfccrf can be. It is commonly observed that Peter seems not to have been any bet- ter qualified aftrT than before the confession, to be the foundation of the church : for In- is reproved for his worldly notions of the Messiah and his kingdom, in these words ; " (ict llur In hind mr, adrrr^ary; for lliou relishest not the things of God ; but the things of man." Tlie word sa- innan signifies adversary. Jesus calls him not hn salanan, Satan ; but simply opponent. Stand aside thou who o|)posest nic in this matter : Thou dost not understand these divine ihiiiirs. There is nnothr-r of the bishop's texts to which, out of courtesy, I must allude : " Peter, when thou art converted, confirm your breth- ren." The meaning of w hich is, — Peter, as you have experienced the 96 DKBATE OiN THE bitterness of repentance, you can hereafter comfort and strengthen your penitent brethren. My learned opponent interprets it thus ; Peter, when you are converted, you shall be my vicar and prince of the apostles .' John xxi, "Lovest thou me more than these,'''' is again before us. The bishop will have these to refer to the apostles. My audience will re- member that when I read the Greek of the passage, he quoted Latin {plus quam has,) as if to correct the Greek by deciding that these was masculine and not neuter, the very point in debate — that when he was challenged to sustain his Latin comment by the original, he immedi- ately after taking up the Greek Testament laid it down. It will elucidate this passage to read the whole in the original, verse 13th. Eo^tTca 'Utou( Kit KnfAQayti tov oigTov, jcai SUceiriv aLiTo7(, )fxiTo l-^dptov ofxotut. In reference to which Jesus says, Sijua I have said that the first church was the Hebrew. It was catholic and apostolic -: for all the twelve apostles were in it. This cannot be said of any other society that ever existed. The whole college of the twelve apostles had their seat in Jerusalem. The Samaritan daughter of .Jerusalem was the first fruits out of Judea. Philip, one of the apostles' evangelists, carried the word of the Lord to Samaria. They had l>elieved. repented, and been baptized. News is brought to Je- rusalem. The cardinals all meet. — The twelve apostles are in session. But where is Peter's chair ? The prince of the apostles, the vicar of Christ, had not yet learned his duty, and his brethren had not yet learned to call him pope. The fact is, they made a legate of him. They sent two legates to Jerusalem. And who do you think were the two first apostolic legates 1 They, indeed sent pope Peter and his broth- er John !! Thus it is clear that the notion of Peter's universal episco- pacy, and princeship of the apostles was not yet conceived. This fact speaks a volume against the pretended successors of Peter. But — again, and still more humiliating to his successors, when Peter had introduced the Gentiles into the church, the brethren of the circum- cision rose up en masse against him, not regarding him as having the least supreme authority in the case. " How," do you ask, " did Peter receive the complaints from all quarters for his daring to innovate, by mere authority on ail tht; iioly brethren ? Did he say, I am Christ's vicar — chief of the apostles, — the supreme head of the church — I hold the keys of the kingdom of heaven ; and do you demand of me, why / should act thus" ?! Never thus, spoke Peter. He did not assume any thing : but tells the matter over, and shows how God had opened the door of faith to the Gentiles ; " and what was I," ho reasons, " that I should withstand (iod V Ought 1 to have stood up and said to the Gentiles, you shall not enter the kingdom of the Messiah, nor be en- rolled amongst the children of God] — In the 11th chapter of the Acts of the apostles, we have a full exposition of the groundless piolension of his successors, in the details of this case from the lips of the apos- tle himself. A third instance of the entire absence of all such vicars in the primitive church, appears in the '* council held at Jerusalem." So the bishop's party designate it, and for the sake of argument, let it be a ronnril. It was not railed by Peter the pope, nor was it a council of the whole world; but of two or three churches. Well, they met. Who was president] Neither the pope nor his legates. Peter is not in the chair; but on the floor. He spoke first, as he was always accustomed to do: but did he dictate the co\irse to be pursiied? No. Had he the honor of drafting or submitting the decrees] He had not. He arose I 13 98 DEBATK 0.\ THE and spoke to the assembly, and told what God had done by him among the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas, also on the floor, then stated what the liord had done by them amon^r the Gentiles, and when they had done, James arose to present his views, "il/y sentence is''' says he, " that we ought to write so and so to the Gentiles." In his views they all acquiesced. They do not say in this letter, "it seemed good to Peter!" No, " it seemed good to «s." Indeed, if any was pope in this assembly, it was James: not Peter. All the popes of Rome as successors of Peter, are therefore not only unscriptural ; but anti-scrip- tural. Again, and stronger still. In Gal. 1st chap, we are told of a cer- tain controversy between Paul and Peter, — not about faith, nor moral- it)'; but about expediency. Paul never would have related this mat- ter : but in self-defence. There were some in Galatia that regarded him as a sub-apostle, not equal to those who had been companions of the Lord during his public ministry. In self-defence, he alRrms that, in conversations with ihe pil/ars, as some called Peter and James and John — three of the oldest apostles — he did not receive a new idea. So far from being dependant on Peter, or inferior to him, he was the only apostle in those days with whom Paul had the slightest dissension : " for," says he, " after Peter came down to Antioch 1 withstood him to the face, for he was to be blamed: for before certain persons came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles; but when they were come, he withdrew and separated from ihem, fearing the Jews. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him, insomuch that Barnabas was car- ried away with their dissimulation. Seeing that they walked not up- rightly, I said to Peter in the presence of them all ; " Why do you com- pel the Gentiles to live as do' the Jews ]" Thus Paul reproved the head of the church, his father, pope Peter, in the presence of all the brethren for a sort of temporizing expediency in its practical details, squinting at dissimulation. All these facts show how contrary to the doctrine and facts of the sacred writings are the assumptions of popery. A word or two from the last will and testament of the apostle Peter. Being far advanced in years he writes two letters containing his last advice to the brethren. In the first he associates himself with the el- ders of the Jewish church, and claims no other eminence than that of fellow elder, and as such exhorts them to feed the flock of God wil- lingly. In the second letter, he wills, that the brethren addressed, "should, after his decease, be mindful of the commandment of ms, the apostles of the Lord and Savior." Thus, with his last words, he dis- claims every attribute of ofiicial supremacy. He is known only in the New Testament, as an apostle, either from his own words simply, or those of Paul, or from any other circumstance, which in the history of the church is recorded from Pentecost to the end of the New Testa- ment. I shall leave other scriptures for the calls of my opponent, and the occasion. I now proceed to show that as there is no" foundation in scripture, so there is none in fact, nor in reason, for the papal supremacy. I have shown, that it wants />o«Vzi'e proof — that it is built on inference — that this inference is not found in the premises — and that other scrip- tural facts and documents preclude the possibility of such an inference. We have emphatically stated, that the first point is to establish the ROMAN CATHOLIC RELTGIOX. 99 office. If there is no office, there can he no officer. But my friend the hishop's system is still more at fault, for if he could prove (what he never will) that there was such an office ; still he has to prove that Peter was the first officer. — That Peter was that officer is as cardinal a point to his system, as that the papal office had been set up by Jesus Christ. The Scriptures are perfectly )nute on that point ! What says church history % It is only inferred that Peter ever ivas in Rome! It is only probable. Barronius only says it is probable he had a see there : he does not moot that question. There is not a single word in all antiquity which positively asserts that Peter was ever bishop of Rome, or was ever in Rome. The gentleman quoted Ircnajus. Can he quote the original 1 I affirm that it does not exist : and even the copy from which he read was not found for centuries after Irenaeus wrote. But admit it to be genuine. I affirm that Irenaeue no where asserts, that Pc tcr was bishop of Rome. If neither he nor his contemporaries assert it, what is the authority of Grotius, or Casaubon, or Usher or such mod- ern authors ? ! It proves nothing. The assertion of my present opponent is worth as much as that of any man who has lived for a thousand years, to prove an event which happened a thousand years before he was born. The bishop and his friend the editor of the Catholic paper and at least fifteen hundred citizens heard me lecture when last in the city; and yet, so faithless is tradition, that I have seen it stated in a print of this city — in a Roman Catholic Telegraph, too, that I had asserted as a proposition to be proved, " that Charles Carroll, of Carrollton was not a Roman Cntholic /" — words that never fell from my lips or pen. If then tradition cannot be kept here for a single week, in this day of light and knowledge, and good faith, how can you respect and believe traditions descending through ages of darkness and superstition 1 — why bring up men from the remote corners of the earth, who lived more than a century after the time in question, to tell us their hearsays or the rumors of pant ages- I have affirmed, that there is no document to prove that Peter was ever bishop of Rome. My friend disputes this point; we are then at issue, and this is a vital point. Let him then meet me upon it, and decide the controversy. Irenaeus says not, that either Peter or Paul was bishop of Rome ; but, " over that church that was planted by Peter and Paul sat Linus." True, the inference is, that Peter and Paul must have been at Rome; if not, how believe that the oluirch was jilanted by thernl But the c.hurcii at Rome 7U'ver was plunled by them. The faith of the Romans was known through all the earth when Paul wrote his letter to them, and at that time ho had never been in that city. The proposition is therefore not true; and Ircnasus, if he wrote so, wrote on erroneous tradition, and is not worthy of credit. Admit, for argu- ment sake, that we take the testimony of the fathers on the succession, which are we to believe 1 They tell us stories irreconcilably dif- ferent. The gentleman trium))haiitly held up a map, as if there were some hidden virtue in it, and said lie could sp(!ak \\\mw it till dooms- day. I have also a map here, which will prove that his map can prove nothing without a tongue in it; and if holding up this map be- fore you could convince you, I should soon carry the point. Bellar- mine admits, that the fathers contradict each other on the succession of the first popes. A phalanx of authors can be adduced to prove tiiat the 100 DEBATE ON XnE fathers are not unanimous upon any one point of importance, on that or any other dofrma of tlic papacy. Divine authority canuot exist, but in the holy oracles : against any other pretended infallible standard, all men should protest. The fathers agreed in bearing testimony to the scriptures, as far as they individually knew them ; hut their unanimous consent on any thing else has not yet been found. Justin Martyr, for example, proves my interpretation of the 16th ch. Matthew, on the roch. He is one of the primitive fathers. He gives substantially the sanie views of that whole passage as I have adduced here. Now it is impossible for my opponent to find a unanimous consent of the fathers with Iiim, as I have Justin Martyr, of the second century, and many others, with me. My standing argu- ment, on the consent of the fathers, is this: I find many of the fathers unequivocally agreeing with me. These, therefore, must express the unanimous consent, if there be any ; for it can- not be unanimous loilhout them. Now, if there be no unanimous consent, the Bomanists build upon a false foundation ,- and if there be, they build on a false foundation ; for wc have that consent, not they. But this unanimous consent fails in the succession. Admitting that Peter was first bishop of Rome, no living man can tell whether Linus or Clement was the second bishop of Rome. The ancients do nob agree upon that point. Tertullian makes Clement second bishop, and others make Linus. I have a chart, in Eusebius, which differs from his own history in various points. I have other charts and indexes that place the bishops of Rome in a dilTcrent order. Eusebius does not place Peter first; nor do any of the fathers. He places Linus first, then Clitus, then Clement. Another tells us, that Peter was first, then Linus, tlien Clement. A fourth, perhaps, on the authority of the last» places Peter first and Clement second. — [Time expired.} Half past 10 o'chcl; .i. M. Bishop Purcell rises — It is well, beloved friends, to keep our eyes upon the polar star, when once we have embarked upon the sea of controversy. The polar star of this question, is the attempted disproof, by my learned friend, of the Roiuan Catholic claim, to be the holy, apostolic, catholic church. He was pledged to show her to be an apostacy from the only true church. Has he proved this ] Is there one intelligent man in this assembly prepared to answer this question in the afiSrmativel I asked, from what church was she an apostacy ? He told us that she had apostatized in the year 1051. But he has not yet told us what or where was the one true holy and apostolic cliurch from wliifh she seceded. There was a good reason for it: no other catholic church existed at the epoch indicated, but ours, the Roman Catholic. We •were then taken to the year 250, or some- time thereabout. These were indefinite words ; and I ask again what and where was the true church from which she apostatized in 250 ? Has ho informed you 1 we were referred to the Novatians — and a Protestant church historiaa Mosheim, tells us — [Mr. Campbell here called Bishop Purcell to order as not speaking to the point; the moderators decided that he was in order and he pro- ceeded.] The gentleman cannot confuse me by these interruptions. ROHAN CATHOLIC EELIGION. 101 My eye is on the star. I say, that Mosheim, a Protestant ecclesiasti- cal historian tells us that the Novatians embraced essential errors. I have quoted from that historian, for this sect and all other prominent sects, to the beirinning' of the 16th centurj'. They taught some doc- trines which Catholics, and some, which Protestants hold. They taught some errors which Catholics and Protestants agree to reject — they taught disorganizing doctrines, which armed the civil power both Catholic and Protestant against them — and these doctrines, Ca- tholics and Protestants mutually abhor. They were not then united, pure, or apostolic. They were not the church of Christ. The ques- tion then reverts upon us — which was the church of Christ, from ■which the Roman Catholic church separated in the 3d century 1 I now come at once to the last speech of the gentleman. — I have already agreed that this controversy is resolvible into two or three grand principles — and by the discussion of these we may succeed in ascertaining their ulterior consequences. If true that Christ has established a head of the Church on earth, it follows that Ave must recognize that liead. So far we are right. If Peter was made that head, we are right. If Peter was to have successors, we are right. If that succession was to last to the end of time, we are right, for we hold these propositions to be irrefragable. If on the contrary, these propositions could be satisfactorily proved to be untrue, the Catholics would be wrong. I have proved the first of these, viz. that Peter was made the head of the church, by Christ, from scripture. And what has my friend discovered to weaken the force of the numerous and strong texts I have adduced, — the rock, the keys, the feeding of the lambs, and of the sheep whom the lambs are wont to follow, the prayer of Christ that Peter's faith should never fail, the charge given liim by Christ to confirm his brethren, his confession of the divinity of Christ be- fore the other apostles, and the Blessedness pronounced on him for that confession by Clirist, the deference shewn him — the poor illiterate fisherman, by Paul, imbued with the subiimest lessons of the Law at the feet of fjamaliel, foe. foe. 7 Why In- says : " Peter, lovcst thou me more than these fish !" My friends, I know not how to treat this interpretation seriously. But since the gentleman is so curious an interpreter, let ns sec if the text will bear him out. After the miracle of the draught of fishes, the apostles, at Christ's invitation, proceeded to some (tistance from their nets and barks, for the purpose of dining. It is natural to sup- pose they selected, for dinner, no more of the fish they had taken, than they would probably eat. ('an my friend say that after they had dined there were any f>f the cooked fish remaining? Tlirre might have been some bones left on the table ; but would Christ puinl to these fish bones, and say, Peter, lovest thou more than llicsr? What a ques- tion for (Christ to ask his leading disciple! Surely such an inter- pretation is absurd. IJiit what is the voice of antiquity 1 IMy friend saya that Justin brarH him out in bis inter|)relalion. \Vill iriy friend point out the passage in that father's works ? Will he say that it is the principal sensr-, the sense that father approves ? I j)ledge myself he will not pretend to do so while refutation is near. Now if scripture is so very clear, and this meaning as obvious as Mr. C. supposes, is it not strange that this light should beam upon us to day for the first 1 2 102 DEBATE ON THE time 1 'riie gentleman charges me with having dared to change the gender of the word signifyinfr ihesc, from neuter to masculine. Does he not know that the word Tcwrarv is both masculine and neuter? It is generally applied to persons, though I do not deny that it may be ap- plied to things. The Greek therefore leaves us as much in the dark as ever. We find a ])arallol passage in the new Testament. " He that loveth father and mother >unrc than mc is not worthy of me." Matth. x. 37. Here the words are Cme i/ui (more than me), i/ut is in the accusative case — Tovrm is in the genitive case. But, my friends, this has nothing to do with the question at issue ; it does not make for or against my argument, whether we adopt tlie natural, or the gross interpretation. Christ said to Peter, " lovest thou «ie." He demands an assurance of his faithful attachment. Peter three times replies in the affirmative, and thrice the command is repeated to him, " feed my lambs," " feed my sheep." The argument is entirely independent of either con- struction referred to. Hence I maintain that Peter was established, head of the church by Jesus (^hrist. The " rock," the " keys," the prayer, the prophecy of the place and manner of Peter's death, which we read in the same chapter, all prove it. The gentleman says that a doctrine should be so clear, that it could not possibly be contested. This is really too soft for a man of Mr. C.'s strong mind. What is there so clear that it could not possibly be contested. Does not the universe tell as clearly as Genesis, that God created the heavens and the earth, and is not that contested 1 What doctrine more clearly revealed in the bible, or more important than the divinity of Christ? and is not that contested? and by one of the most learned societies of christians in the United States, I mean the Unitarians. They read the bible and they think it impiety and blas- phemy to call Jesus Christ God ! It was essential in the Jewish institution that there should be a high priest. If the old institution was a type of the new, where is the anti-type ? And if the headship of the high priest of the Jews dero- gated not from the authority of God the Father, who was pleased to be their special ruler, neither does the headship of the pope derogate from the supreme authority of God the Son, Jesus Christ, who acquir- ed the church by his blood and established Peter its visible head on earth, to exercise the office during his natural life, and by his succes- sors for ever. My friend flies from scripture to tradition, and from a father of the early age to a modern historian. I will pledge myself to this en- lightened assembly that the supremacy of Peter and of Peter's suc- cessors in the Roman see can be abundantly attested by an appeal to tradition : and I may here observe that Baronius has been misrepre- sented. He does not say it is not improbable that Peter fixed his see at Rome — of this he knew there was no doubt ; but that it was not im- probable he fixed his see there by the express command of Christ, which is, the intelligent hearer will perceive, quite a different propo- sition. Peter acted as the other apostles did, under the guidance of in- spiration, in the choice of the scene of his pastoral toils; but Baronius thinks it not improbable that Christ eocpressly commanded him to se- lect Rome for his — There he could " teach all nations." Mr. C. asserts that for a thousand years there is not a voice heard to attest ROMAN CATHOUC RELIGION. 103 this fact. My friends, not one voice, but five Iiundred attest it. There is one loud chorus of testimony among the fathers and historians, giving almost universal consent to the doctrine. Some obscure indi- viduals may have doubted, or denied it in late years. They are but motes on the surface of the overwhelming stream of testimony. Again my friend went back to the bible. He read of the high priest — but he cannot open the bible without seeing his own refutation written there — almost the first words that struck my ears were, the dresses and anoint- ing of the priests. Where are such things done among Protestants 1 Do they not make void the scriptures 1 Anointing the clergy and the sick, — commanded by the bible — rejected by Protestants — superseded by the fashions of the day ! Again : Aaron was separated that he should bless and sanctifj* — and yet if the pope bless or sanctify, he is an im- pious assumer of what belongs to God alone !! The case of Korah, Dathan and Abiram was mentioned. God re- ally appears to me to extort from the adversaries of his church the most striking proof of her authority, vindicated in the Type, from the sacrilegious contradictions of the schismatics of the old law. The ground opened and swallowed them up ! So have all the sects, that in the early ages opposed the church, perished. Th« grave has hidden their guilt from the earth, too happy if they bear not its pen- alty in the world that expands beyond the grave ! Again 250 priests perished for opposing the ordinance of God ! the ecclesiastical guide he had appointed ! My friend asks, if the headship of Peter and his successors were as certainly divine as the high priesthood of the old law, would it not have been established by proof as plain? Why, he emphatically de- manded, cannot the Roman pontiff, like Aaron, shew his authority by an equally convincing miracle *? My friends, I take the gentleman at his word. He that has eyes to see let him see. Has not God wrought a similar miracle — I will fearlessly say — a far more splendid miracle, to attest the preeminence of the see of Peter 1 Has not the night of Mahommedanism and infidelity thrown its sable pall over the once flourishing churches of Africa and Asia 1 Has not the bright light of the gospel become extinct in the most celebrated of the sees founded by the other apostles — Crete, Corinth, Ephcsus, Antioch, Alexandria, Philippi, Jerusalem 1 Where is the hymn of praise to Christ inton- ed, the voice of pure confession heard, the tabernacle of the tes- timony seen in any of these famous churches, where St. Paul had formed such a multitude of adorers in spirit and in truth 1 which he Tisited with so much solicitude, prayed for with so much fervor, and loved with so much tenderness. Returning to visit these churclies, not on the following day as Moses did the rods of the twelve triiies, but after eighteen himdred years, we see that the rod of Aaron, the church formed by the high priest appointed by Jesus Christ in the New Law, has b\idded ami blossomed, and produced fruit of which all the nations havo participated, while the churches formed by the other apostles have been stricken with a melancholy sterility, and have utterly withered ! 'I"he murmuring of the children of Israel against Moses and Aaron ceased when they beheld the prodigy rela- ted in the book of Numbers ; is it too much to expert that we will be leas insensible to an efjually autbenlic declaration in favor of tho church and pontiff, the special objects of the divine protection and care? 104 DEBATE 0:V THE When Pius, VI. died at Valence, in France, it was said that quick lime was thrown on his corpse, that no vestige of it might remain, and infidelity boasted that Christianity was buried in the same grave with its pontiff. But a successor was soon beheld to ascend into the chair of Peter — alas ! he too, is doomed to suffer contumely for the name of Jesus. He is seized with violence, by a ruthless soldiery, and car- ried off from Rome, an exile and a prisoner, to Fontainebleau. The doom of his persecutor is written : he is precipitated from the giddy heights of his ambition, and the meek, but invincible heir of Peter's sacred power, contrary to all human foresight, is reinstated by a Pro- testant government, by 30,000 Protestant bayonets, in the peaceful ex- ercise of his duties, as the chief pastor of the Catholic world. Eng- land, with all thy faults I love thee still. You are Protestants, but you can be just. Rome, changeless amid change, Rome, free among the dead, unaffected by earthly revolutions, by earthly conquests un- subdued, why have the nations raged, ond the people devised vaia things against thee ] The Lord is thy protector still. He hath won- derfully sustained thee, amidst all the vicissitudes of human institu- tions. " He that dwelleth in heaven," to use the language of the Psalmist, " hath laughed at them that stood up against thee, and the Lord shall deride them." My friend would call it ^^ morbid" in England, to sympathise with the Catholics, as he has called your generous sym- pathies fdr your persecuted fellow-citizens ; but it is not morbid, it ia magnanimous, it is just to confess an error, to abjure an unfounded prejudice, and to side with the wrongfully oppressed. I quoted scripture to prove that Christ was the corner stone, on which the whole building securely rests — and that Peter is the rock of the foundation, deriving whatever strength it has thus exhibited from Christ. There is no contradiction in this. I am compelled to follow the zigzag course of my friend. The reader of the printed controversy will be at no loss to bring together the diverging rays of evidence and to find my answers to objections, where they may be, apparently out of place. There is no distinction of persons in Syriac. In Greek it is once TTttrfo;, and again 5r;)T/)a — but this change of gender is merely to avoid a repetition of the same word in the same sentence. This is reason sufficient, to account for the difference. I give my friend thanks for proving that Peter was not Satan. It is the correct reading, and therefore, I agree with his interpretation of the text; when Christ saya to Peter, " get thee behind me Satan," that is you, who differ from me on this particular subject. This text has been much abused. Again : Peter did think, that he loved .Tesus more than the rest, and Christ knew that he did. Do you remember, my friends, the scene which took place shortly before the Savior suffered ? When he told his apostles, with a holy melancholy on his sacred heart, that one of them would betray him — that the shepherd should be stricken, and the sheep dispersed ? Ah ! is there not something in the noble hearted enthusi- asm of Peter, which is at once the cause of his offence and its pallia- tion ? " Although all shall be scandalized in thee, yet not I." This proves an impulsiveness, an ardor, and a strength of attachment to the person of Christ, which Peter, too confidently it may be, but yet sin- cerely, believed to be greater than the other disciples felt for their di- vine master. Jesus knew this, but he warns him not to be presumptuous. " Amen, ROMAN CATHOLIC REMGION. 105 I say to thee, to-day, even in this night, before the cock crow twice, thou Shalt deny me thrice," Mark xiv. 30. From this, and other texts, Peter's ardor, and the Savior's knowledge of his confidence in his own steadfastness are perfectly plain. Why, then, deny them both 1 I quoted the vulgate, not through ignorance of Greek, on which I have shewn as much knowledge as my friend; but not to boast of a little learning on the words, riAw-v tou7*.v. The Greek, the Latin, and the English, as verbal criticism is necessary to elucidate the meaning of the text, are by a singular coincidence, in this case, equally ambigu- ous. How can an unlettered Protestant understand the text? The popes do not claim to be lords, spiritual, and temporal. But very few of them exercised any temporal power beyond the limits of their own principality, where they rule, as Gibbon told you, by the voice of a free people whom they have redeemed from slavery. Their throne is established in the affections of their people, who, with rea- son, prefer their pontiff's mild sway to kingly usurpation — the crosier, to the sceptre. The popes have never taken the title of kings of Rome. I can shew from Waddington and Southey, both Protestant histori- ans of the church, that through centuries of darkness and doubt and civil commotion, while the Turk was ravaging the southern regions of Europe and the northern hordes were pouring down in swarms from their ice-bound regions, desolating the blooming fields, and destroying all that was useful and beautiful of the works of civilization, the pope was the only savior of Europe, from their barbarian ravages. He gave to science and to letters the only refuge which could then have availed them — the refuge of an altar — and the now calumniated monks who reproduced in more auspicious times, the intellectual ray. They handed us the works of the sages, and heroes, the poets, historians and oratorS of Greece and Rome across the isthmus of the " dark ages" 60 called. They preserved for us a better gift — the Bible. Benefits conferred by the church. — " Yet should we be very unjust to the Roman Catholic church, if we bhould allow it to be supposed, that she opened no recep- tacles, for the nurture of true excellence; that in her ecncral institutions, espe- cially in her earlier age, she has overlooked the iiioraT necessities of man — the truth is far otherwise. We have repeatedly observed, how commonly, in seasons of barbarism, religion was employed in supplying the defects of civil government aad diffusing consolation and security. The lYuce of God mitigated the fury of private warfare, by limiting the hours o( vengeance, and interposing a space for the operation of justice and humanity. The nauie of the church was associated with peace; aiid it was a prouder position, than when she trampled on the necks of kings, (what she never did by the bye as I shall prove.) The emancipation of the Serfs was another cause, equally sacred, in which her exertions were rc- peatetlly emnloyed. In her jnlerff rence in the concerns of monarchs and nations, she frequently appeared as the advocate of the weak, and the adversary of arbi- . trary power. Kven the much abused law of Asylum served through a long pe- riod, as a check on b;u-onial oppression, ralher than an encouragement to crime. The duty of charity, during the better ages of the church, was by no means neglected by the secular clergy, while it was the practice and office of the mo- nastic establishments. And even fh<: discipline, so strictly inculcated by the earlier prelates, however arbitrary in its exercise, and jieniicious in its ahii.te, was not unprofitable in arresting the first steps, and restraining tlif earliest dis- positions to sin. Confession and penance, and the awful censures of Ihe church, when dispensed with discretion, must have been potent instruini ntx for the im- provement of uncivilized society." Wiiddinirton's f'hunh Mist. luirre 5-lfi, New Vork edit. \m',. ^ ^ ^ We now come to the word Kkx^h (cleros,) which the gentleman says means lot and not clergy. f,ot does mean the whole people of 14 106 DrUATK ON THK GocJ — rlernry and laity. Now if tlie apostle could not lord it over the vhole ])eople, he could iiotlord it over the clergy. 'Die pope does not lord it over the consciences of either clergy or laity — he believes as they do. 'J'he apostles sent Peter and .John to Samaria. Peter and John probably offered themselves for the early mission — Peter, to whom God had given superior power — and John, who had leaned on the bo- som of Jesus at supper — both pre-eminent apostles, to confirm the peo- ple of Samaria. No man can read the New Testament attentively without seeing, at almost every page, the evidence of Peter's divinely appointed and ac- knowledged primacy ; or the history of the church, without every where discovering the primacy of his successors. Not one council has been received that the pope did not approve. His approbation is in the last resort, the only certain test of a council's orthodoxy. Peter spoke first in the council at Jerusalem. Peter was justly re- primanded by Paul. The very fact of Paul mentioning his boldness on this occasion, confirms the fact of Peter's supremacy. So did Ire- neeus remonstrate with pope Victor in the controversy of the Quarto- decimans — about the time of observing the Easter — and the pope's sentiments prevailed — although Irenanis' dissuasive did good. So did the controversy about re-baptization terminate between St. Cyprian and the popes Cornelius and Stephen. The popes' decision was every where received. Now Paul himself did the same for which he blamed Peter. He knew and prized the freedom with which Christ had made him free, yet he says, " If meat scandalize my brother, I will not eat it forever." He vainly persists in saying there is no good ground for asserting that Peter was ever in Rome, after all the proof I have adduced. Here is Robinson's Calrnet, a Protestant dictionary of the Bible, a stan'dard work in Protestant libraries. Calraet was a Iloman Catholic. He was a prodigy of learning and ancient literature — and Robinson, a Protestant divine, thought he could not furnish a better gift to the public than this book. " It the reader wishes to see the evidence from antiquity, on which Peter's having been at Rome rests, he will find it fully set forth by Lardner, who con- cludes his inquiry as follows : This is the general, uncontradicted, disinterest- ed testimony of ancient writers in the several parts of the world, Greeks, Lat- ins, Syrians. As our Lord's prediction concerning the death of Peter, is record- ed in one of the four Gospels, it is very likely that christians would observe the accomplishment of it, which must have been in some place. And about this place, there is no diflerence among christian writers of ancient times. Never any other place was named besides Rome; nor did any other city, ever glory in the martyrdom of Peter. It is not for our honor, nor for our interests, either Bs christians or Protestants, to deny the truth of events ascertained by early and .well attested tradition. If any make an ill use (as /le calls it) of such facts, we are not accountable for it. We are not, from a dread of such abuses, to over- throw the credit of all history, the consequence of which would be fatal." Rob- inson's Calmet.p. 74L The gentleman has said that not one voice has attested the fact of the succession of the Roman see for a thousand years. I have quoted Eusebius, a Greek father of the fourth century, translated by a Pro- testant minister, a splendid work. Here is a list of 29 bishops who sat in the chair of St. Peter, all of whom he names in the body of the work; also the succession in the churches of Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Laodicea, &c. Of St. Peter. (Simon Magus) " entering the city of Rome, by the co-operation of that ma- ROMAN CATHOLIC BELIGION. 107 lignant spirit which had fixed its seat there, his attempts v.ere soon so far suc- cessful, as to be honored as a god, with the erection of a statue by the inhabitants of that city. This, however, did not continue long; for immediately under the reign of Claudius, by the benign and gracious providence of God, Peter, that powerful and great apostle, who, by his courage took the lead of all the rest, was conducted to Nome against this pest of mankind. He, like a noble commander ofGod, fortified with divine armor, bore the precious merchandise of the re- vealed light from the East to those in the West, announcing the liglit itself, and salutary docrine of the soul, the proclamation of the kingdom of God." — Book II. chap. 14, page 64. Of Linus. "After the martyrdom of Paul and Peter, Linus was the first that received the episcopate at Rome." — Book III. chap. 2, page 82. Anaci.etds. "After Vespasian had reigned about ten years, he was succeeded by his son Titus; in the second year of whose reign, Linus, bishop of the church of Rome, who had held the olBce about twelve years, transferred it to Anacletus." — Chap. 13, page 100. CLE.ATENT. " In the twelfth year of the same reign, (Domitian's,) after Anacletus had been bishop of Rome twelve years, he was succeeded by Clement."— Chap. 15, page 100. EUARESTUS. " In the third year of the above mentioned reign (Trajan's,) Clement, bishop of Rome, committed the episcopal charge to Euarestus." — Chap. 34, page 120. Alex.\xder. " About the twelfth year of the reign of Trajan, after Euarestus had completed the eighth year as bishop of Rome, he was succeeded in the episcopal of&ce by Alexander." — Book TV. chap. 1, page 128. XVSTUS. " But in the year of the same (Adrian's) reign, Alexander, bishop of Rome, died, having completed the tenth year of his ministrations. Xystus was his suc- cessor." — CTiap. 4, page 130. Telespiiorus and Hyginus. " In the first year of this (Antonine's) reign, and in the eleventh j-ear of his episcopate, Telesphorus departed tliis life, and was succeeded in the charge of the Roman church by Hyginus." — Chap. 10, page 137. PiUS. " But Hyginus dying after the fourth year of his office, Pius received the episcopate." — Chap. 11, page 138. Amcetus. "And Pius dying at Rome in the fifteenth year of his episcopate, the church there was governecl by Anicetus." — Ibid, page 138. .'ioTER. '• If was in the eighth year of the above mentioned reign, viz. that of Verus, that Anicetus, who held the episcopate of Rome for eleven years, was succeeded by Soter." — Chap. 19, page 156. ErXUTHERUS. " Soter, bishop of Rome, died after having held the episcopate eight years. Ha was succeeded by Elcuthcrus, the twelfth in order from the apostles." — Book V. Prelim, page 168. Victor. " In thn tenth yrar of the reign of C'ommoduf", Eleutherus, who had held the episcopate for thirteen years, was succeeded by Victor." — Chap. 22, page 206. Zephyrinus. "But after this author (Victor,) had superintended the rhurrh, Zepliyrinus was appointed his successor about the ninth year of the reign of Severus." — Chap. 28, page 214. Cai-i.isthus and Urpanus. " In the first yj-ar of the latter (Antonine's n ign,) Zephyrinus the bishop of Rome, departed thin life, ofter having rhargc of the church eigiitcen years. He was succeeded in the episcopate by Cullittliui, who survived bim five years, and left the church to Urbanus.— Chap. 21, page 242. 108 DKBATE OX THE PONTIANUS. " Whilst this was the state of tilings, Urban, wlio liad been bishop of Rome eightyears, was succeeded by Poiitiaiius." — Chap. 23, page 243. Anteuos and Fabianus. "Gordian succeeded IMaxiimis in tlic sovereignty of Rome, when Pontifinus who had held the episcopate six years, was succeeded by Anteros in the church of Rome; he also is succeeded by P'libianus." — Chap. 29, page 248. Cornelius. " Decius .... raised a persecution against the church, in which Fabianus suffered martyrdom, and was succeeded as bishop of Rome by Cornelius." — Chap. 39, page 254. Lucius and Stephen, "After Cornelius had held the episco|>al otVice at Rome about three years, he was succeeded by Lucius, but the latter did not hold the office quite eight months, when dying he transferred it to Stephen." — Book VIL chap. 2, page Stephen and Xystus IL " But after Stephen had held the episcopal office two years, he was succeeded by Xystus." — Chap. 5, page 273, DioNYsrus. " Xystus had been bishop of Rome eleven years, when he waa succeeded by Dionysius."— Chap. 27, page 302. Feijx. " Dionysius, who had been bishop of Rome for niue years, was succeeded by Felix."— Chap. 30, page 308. EurycHiANTjs, Caius, and Marcelt mus. *' At this time Felix, having held the episcopate at Rome five years, was suc- ceeded by Eutychianus, and he did not hold the office quite ten months, when he left his place to be occupied by Caius of our own day. Caius, also, presided about fitteen years, when he was succeeded by Marcellinus." — Chap. 32, page 310. Miltiades. " Constantine Augustus, to Miltiades bishop of Rome." — Book X. chap. 5. page 429. i need only refer to what I have read from this authentic historian for splendid and indisputable proof. Here is the succession equally plain in all the churches, but longest hi Rome. Thence it has been faithfully noticed, and regularly perpetuated in an uninterrupted chain of pontiffs down to the present chief pastor, auspiciously presiding over all the church. Now, my friend, in the name of God what is to become of this con- troversy, when testimony like this is overlooked] And to close the testimony of Eusebius who has embodied that of the preceding ages, so as to leave no doubt, that the same identical doctrines, the present organization, orders and sacraments of the Catholic church were those of the first ages of Christianity, and heresy too the same then that it now is. I crave your attention for one of the most instructive chapters that could possibly be read on a subject of such absorbing interest to the Christian. OJ" J^'ovalus, his manners and hahils, and his heresy. About this time appeared Novatus (j\ovati;in) a presbyter of the church of Rome, and a man elevated with haughtiness against these (tiiat had fallen), as if there was no room for theni to hope salvation, not even, if they performed every thing for a genuine and pure confession. He thus became the leader of the pe- culiar heresy of those who, in the pomp of their imaginations, called themselves Cathari. A ver}' large counril beiugli' Id on account of this, at which sixty in- deed of the bishops, but a still greater number of prchbyters and deacons were present ; the pastors of the remaining provinces, accordmg to their places, deli- fcerated separately what should be done: this decree was passed by all; "That Novatus, indeed, and those who so arrogantly united with him, and those that Lad determined to adoptive uncharitable and most inhuman opinion of the man, KOMA?f CATHOLIC RELIGION. 109 these they considered among those that were alienated from the church; but that brethren who had incurred any calamity, should be treated and healed with the remedies of repentance." There are also epistles of Cornelius, bishop of Rome, addressed to Fabius, bi- shop of Antioch, which sliow the transactions of the council of Rome, as also, the opinions of all those in Italy and Africa, and the regions there. Others there are also written in the Roman tongue, from Cyprian, and the bishops with him in Africa. In these, it is shewn that they also agree in the necessity of relieving those who had fallen under severe temptations, and also in the propriety of ex- communicating the author of the heresy, and all that were of his party. To these is attached also an epistle from Cornelius on the decrees of the council, besides others on the deeds of Novatus, from which we may add extracts, that those who read the present work may know the circumstances respecting him. What kind of a character IVovatus was, Cornelius informs Fabius, writing as fol- lows: " But that you may know, says he, how this singular man, who formerly aspired to the episcopate, and secretfy concealed within himself this precipitate ambition, making use of those confessors that adhered to him from the beginning as a cloak for his own folly, I will proceed to relate: Maxinius, a presbyter of our church, and Urbanus, twice obtained the highest reputation for their con- fessions. Sidonius also, and Celerinus, a man wlio, by the mercy of God, bore every kind of torture in the most heroic maiiiKr, and, by the firmness of his own faith strengthened tlie weakness of the flesh, completely worsted the adversaiy. These men, therefore, as they knew him, and had well sounded his artifice and duplicity, as also his perjuries and falsehoods, his dissocial and savage character, returned to the holy church, and aiinouncfd all his devices and wickedness, which he had for a long time dissembled within hiinself, and this too in the presence of many bishops; and the same also, in the presence of many presbyters, and a freat number of laymen, at the same time lamenting and sorrowing that they ad been seduced, and had nbandoned the church for a short time, through the agency of that artful and malicious beast." After a little, he further says : We have seen, beloved brother, within a short time, an extraordinary conversion and change in him. For this most illustrious man, and he who affirmed with the most dreadful oaths, that he never aspired to the episcopate, has suddenly appeared a bishop, as thrown among us by some machine. For this dogmatist, this (pre- tended) champion of ecclesiastical discipline, when he attempted to seize and usurp the episcopate not given him from above, selected two desperate characters as his associates, to send them to some small, and that the smallest, part of Italy, and from thence, by some fictitious ])l.ixi! iy.x>.i;Ti»y • Th>) word ralliolir, in its Greek etymology, menns univcrgul, as wc )iBvo nomctimoa ox- ptninc'l it in Ihiii trnn/ilntiiiii. It ik npiilicrl to l)in (,'liriiiliiiii, oh n iiiiiversul rhiirrh, partly to riiitinKuiih it frcmi tlm nrii-ieiit rhiirrli of llif Jiwb, which wn» hinilerl, purlial, iiixl par- tiriilnr in ill ihiruiioii, milijiriii iinil cuiiiilry. 'I'h'' <'hri«tian in ulxo rnllnl n uiiiviriml or cnlholii' rlmrch, l>rinii«o it mint in rejnril to ilorlrini' lioM i/voil urmper, qnod vbiiine, quod ab omnihut. In tin* Inllir view, whiih it kIiouIiI he well obnerved in tlie oricinnl np|iln-o- lion. It i» rynonymoui Willi orlhodoi. 'J'liiii in iviileni, from the fiiit that our aulhcir tippling it lo different rhiirrh''» in other pnrlii of hiii hinlory. And in the preneiit inHlunrp I ho ox- prcmiun ii cenernl, « tntliotir thurrh. It in in n nenne allied lo lhi» nl«o, Ihni we nro, no doubt, lo un(h'r~lanil llin till'? of our EenernI, (ralliolir) ejilNlleo. in the New TeHlamcnt. They arc cat/tolic, heraunc an ronimnanl to the dorlrineii of the rliiirch in all rei(|Hr.t«, Ihcy have been also universally received. In this aonie, tlio term ii nlno aynonymoua with can- onical. 110 DEBATE ON THE In whirl), however, he well knew, (for how coukl he be ignorant ?) that there were t'orty-six presbyters, seven deacons, seven sub-ileacons, fortv-two acuiuthi (clerks,) exorcists, reailers, and janitors, in all fiUy- two ; widows, with the afflicted and needy, more than firtten-hundrcd ; all which the goodness and love of (iod doth support and nourish. But neither this great number, so necessary in the church, nor those that by the providence of God were wealthy and opulent, toge- ther with the innumerable multitude of the people, were able to recall him and turn him from such a desperate and presumptuous course." And again, after these, he subjoins the following: " Now let us also tell by what means and conduct he had the assurance to claim the episcopate. Whether, indeed, it was because he was engaged in the church from the beginning, and endured many condicts for her, and encountered many and great dangers in the cause of true religion? None of all this. To him, indeed, the author and instigator of his faith was Satan, who enter- ed into and dwelt in him a long time. Who, aided by the exorcists, when attacked with an obstinate disease, and being supposed at the point of death, was baptised by aspersion, in the bed on which he lay ; if, indeed, it be proper to say that one like hmi did receive baptism. But neither when he recovered from disease, did he par- take of other things, which the rules of the church prescribed as a duty, norwashe sealed (in confirmation) by the bishop. But as he did not obtain this, liow could he obtain the Holy Spirit V And again, soon after, he says: " He denied he was a presbyter, through cowardice and the love of life, in the time of persecution. For when requested and exhorted by the deacons, that he should go forth from his re- treat, in whichhe had imprisoned himself, and shouldcome to the relief ofthc bre- thren, as far as was proper and in the power of a presbyter to assist brethren reciuir- ing relief, he was so far from yielding to an}' exhortation of the deacons, that he went away offended and left them. For he said that he wished to be a presbyter no longer, for he was an admirer of a different philosophy." After this, he add* another deed, the worst of all the man's absurdities, thus : "For having made the oblation, and distributed a part to each one, whilst giving this, he compels the unhappy men to swear instead of blessing ; holding the hands of the one receiv- ing, with both his own, and not letting them go until he had sworn in these words, for I shall repeat the very words: ' Swear to me, by the body and blood of our Savior, Jesus Christ, that you will never desert me, nor turn to Cornelius.' And the unhappy man is then not suflered to taste until he had first cursed him- self; and instead of saying Amen, after he hael taken the bread, he says, 'I will no longer return to Cornelius." And, after other matters, he again proceeds, as follows : " Now,3'ou must know, that he is stripped and abandoned, the brethren leaving him every day and returning to the church. He was also excommunicat- ed by Moses, that blessed witness, who but lately endured a glorious and wonder- ful martyrdom, and who, whilst yet among the living, seeing the audacity and the folly of the man, excluded him from the communion, together with the five presbyters that had cut themselves oft" from the church." At the close of the epistle, he gives a list of the bishops who had come to Rome, and had discarded the incorrigible disposition of Novatus; at the same time adding the names, to- gether with the churches governed by each. He also mentioned those that were not present at Rome, but who, by letter, assented to the decision of the former, adding also the names and the jjarticular cities whence each one had written. Such IS the account written by Cornelius to Fabius bishop of Antioch. — From pages 263-4-5-6-7 of Eusebius' Eccles. Hist, transl. by Rev. C. F. Crus6, Book vi. chap. 43. — [Time expired.] Half past U, J. M. Mr. Campbeli, rises — I have some respect, my friends, not only to the audience who hear, but to those who may read this discussion ; and, therefore, I wish my argument to be as continuous and unbroken as possible. I could, indeed, wish that my ingenious and eloquent opponent would reply to my speeches in regular sequence, and thus give more of system and tenacity to our debate. Before I trace his zigzag course, I wish to add to my last speech a few kindred considerations. While it behooves him to prove that Peter was first bishop of Rome, I am gratuitously in display of my resources, as the advocate of Protestantism, rather spontaneously prov- nOMAN CATHOLIC RELIGIOX. Ill ing a negative, or showing tliat Peter never was bishop of Rome. Two considerations may be added to my remarks on this head: 1st. The special commission, which he had to- the Jews as Paul had to the Gentiles, precludes the idea of his here devoting himself to any por- tion of the Gentile world. The "ministry of the circumcision" was committed to him, and therefore not the Roman capital; but rather the Syrian capital or Jerusalem should have been the place of his location. 2d. His commission, as apostle, precludes the idea of his being sta- tioned as bishop at any one place. You cannot place Peter as bishop of Rome, any more than you can make the president of the United States mayor of Cincinnati. The duties of these officers are not more incompatible than the duties of an apostle and a resident bishop. What are the duties of the bishop's chair 1 Are they not to watch over a particular diocese? What does the apostles' commission say ■? "Go ye into all the world, and announce tiie glad tidings to the whole crea- tion." It would be as easy to prove that the bishop of London may be vicar of Bray, or curate of St. Ives, as that Peter was, or could be, bishop of Rome. These two considerations deserve the attention of my friend, and I hope that he will not pass them too in silence. That every important office, essential to the government of any com- munity, must have a place clearly specific in the constitution is scarce- ly necessary to prove; yet, as my opponent seems to slur over this matter, I shall read a sentence or two of the Constitution of the United States, to show that in tlie estimation of its framers, it was necessary to have a distinct assertion of the office and power of the president. Art. II. Sect. 1. Tlie executive power shall be vested in a ['resident of the United State>i of America. He shall hold his oflice during tl.e term of four years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term as fol- lows: Sect. 2. " Kach state shall appoint, in sucli niannor as the legislature there- of may direct, a number of electors, e(|iial to the whf)le number of senators and repredcntatives to which the state may be entitled in the congress; but no senator or representative, or person holding any olliee of trustor profit under the Unit- ed States, shall be appointed an elector." 77ie American's Guide, p. 20. Now the head of the christian church was, at least, as wise as the convention which framed this instrument, foreseeing all the difficulties of the church in all time, and as he was determined to make all things plain, and certainly he was as capable as they to reveal and express iiis own will, had tic resolved to build his church on tlie shoulder of St. Peter, he would have unequivocally expressed it. lie would have defined the office, appointed the first officer, and legislated the mode of election. The practice of electing popes in the church of Rome is a candid ackiiowledgnient that there is tio law in the case: fur tlicy have had very diffi^rent modes at dilTerent periods of their history. What would we Americans say, if every few years a new mode should be adopted, without regard to the constitution 1 Would they submit to Burh a chief magistrate 1 The gentlriiian proceeded to read and reiterate his remarks on two passages of scripture, often bttfore us: he objects to my criticism on the last chapter of John. His last remarks enable me to give it a more thorough exposition. He says my construction "requires the accusathr for Ihrsc." I say, with more of tlie philosophy of iimiruage, his construrljoii requires the nominative. The question would have been plainly this: "Do you love, inn more than these love me." XXwh, it is true, always requires the genitive; but the whole construction of 112 DEBATE ON THE the sentence would have been changed, if these were to be the nomina- tive to the verb here understood. My construction is critically correct as the sentence now reads, but it will not bear his construction. But there is yet another great assumption in the quotation of this passage on which I have not yet emphasized. He says, '■'■feed my sheep''' means, feed my pastors, and ^^ feed my lambs^^ means, feed my Jlock. Mark the assumption, that sheep signifies pastors, and lambs the people! Where does he find authority for this? If "s/^«/)" any where else signified ♦' c/er/::y," and "lambs" laity, there would be some plausibility in it; but with the absence of such usage it is supremely whimsical and arbitrary; and yet the point of this passage rests upon the assumption of sheep for clergy. So far he presses it into his service, for that bishops are to feed the flock is not disputed, but that one of them is before the others is the question in debate. The gentleman, on Saturday, called my interpretation of this pas- sage a fish story ; this mode of treating so holy an institution, so solemn a matter, is not in the true dignity of the subject, nor of the occasion ; nor is it very respectful to the great personage on whose words we comment ; but the audience have not met it with a laugh, and therefore I presume they felt the incongruity. In the same style are the morning's remarks on the bones, &c. but the bishop might remem- ber there was more in the premises than the spoils of a single meal ; there were many fish and all the apparatus before them, but no one would interpret the words of the question in that style on any other occasion. It was sustenance in general, and not a particular meal, concerning which the Savior spoke. The gentleman suggests that, in the 1st chap, of John, Christ in his first interview with Peter changes his name to Cephas ; and he as- sumes " that it was that he might afterwards make him the rock of his church !" It was a very common thing in the history of the patri- archs and Jews to change names. Thus we find from the beginning of their history, various instances of this: " Sarai" is changed into Sarah; " Abram" into Mraham; "Jacob" into Israel. Two of the apostles were called " Boanerges" sons cf Thunder ; but that did not convert them into thunder ; neither did the name Cephas convert Peter into a stone. If I were to give a reason for the addition to Peter's name, (but it was neither change nor addition, rightly considered,) I would say that it was most probably occasioned by the fact, that Daniel spoke of the kingdom of the Messiah under the figure of « stone cut out of the mountain. With an eye probably to this kingdom of the stone, (as Peter was the first convert,) his name is improved by being translated into Syriac ; for after all, it is rather a translation oi' Pctros than an addition to it! He was, however, the beginning of this new spiritual edifice, and a foundation stone; but only one among many. This kingdom of the stone, it is foretold by Daniel, was to com- mence in the days of the Cesars : but it was to become the kingdom of the mountain. It was, indeed, to become a great mountain, and fill the whole earth. This building is composed of a succession of foun- dations, provided only that all the popes are successors of Peter, in virtue of his being the rock. To have this whole building at the foundation, or to be always laying new foundations in every election of a pope is rather a singular idea, which grows out of the extravagance of the Romish assumption. ROJIAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 113 The bishop observes that a headless trunk is worth nothing, and would seem to think that our argument on that subject leaves the church without a head. Has the church no other head than the popel Of whatever church the pope is head, that church is the body of the pope: And is it Christ's body tool The Romanists are the body of the bishop's church — cut the head olF that body, or annul the pope's assumption and you destroy its organization. The gentleman rightly appreciates my argument: he feels that it makes the church of Rome a headless trunk: but the mistake is in supposing that this annihila- tion of the pretension annuls the church of Christ. Jesus Christ is in- dependent of the pope. He is head ; and the saints of all ages are the component parts of his spiritual, his mystical body. The gentleman's allusion to the Higli Priest was peculiarly unfor- tunate. There never was but one high priest at a time : one in hea- ven and one on earth is without a single hint or allusion in the Bible. We cannot now descant upon such an incongruity. The word 'leput (Hierus) priest, occurs not once in the New Testa- ment, in reference to christian bishops, or deacons. It is only found once, and that in the apocalyptic style, in all the christian scriptures : for the idea of any one officiating on the earth as a sacrificing priest, or that christian bishops have aught of a priestly character is anti-christ- ian. But Christ is the anti-type of Aaron. The order of Aaron is ex- tinct. The order of Melchisidec is the model of the Christian High Priesthood. Christ is called of God as was Aaron : but he is called to officiate after the order of Melchisidec. The doctrine of Protestanta is, that their High Priest made one great sacrifice for sin on earth : and that he offered it in the heavens ; and that by one offering of him- self, he has perfected the sanctified. " Brethren, consider the high priest of our profession, Jesus Christ." He ever lives and ever intercedes, and is able to save to the uttermost all that come by him to God. We, therefore, need no high priest on earth. The gentleman has told us too often of his love for America, and his love for Kngland. If he repeats these declarations so often, we shall begin to thinii he loves too much in word, and too little in fact. He tells you of 30,000 English bayonets employed in defence of the pa- pacy. And what of thisl Klnglaiid is the cradle of all political free- dom. Our notions of free government were all promulgnd in English books, and tauglil in Englisii schools before they were imported here. We have, indeed practised upon the science of free government more than our mother country. But as in America, we tolerate all religions : 80 the British empire in every country wlu^re she has territory or sub- jects, supports and protects all. England tolerates every thing. She supports (yalholicism in Canada, Fipiscopacy in England, Presbyteri- anism in Scotland, and Paganism in the East Indies. Is she not too free and tolerant for my opponent, and for many Protestants ? ! She takes no part against any religion. The popular doctrine in England at this moment is, that Church and State ought not to be amalgama- ted, or consocialed under the same earthly head. Inderd, she is dis- posed to follow her American children very far in this doctrine. The bishop seems to apply to Peter what was common to all the apostles, " VVhatHor'ver you sluill bind on-carth, shall he bound in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose on earth, shall i)e loosed in heaven." I remark »ipon this passage, that when the Messiah gave k2 15 11-4 DEBATK Oy TUE the keys to Peter to open tlie kingdom of heaven to Jews and Gentiles, he did not appropriate to him the solo and exclusive power of binding and loosing: this power ho bestowed on all the apostles. For after Peter opened the kingdom, they all introduced citizens into it, as well as he; and had the same oflicial power; for as John says, chap. 20: he addressed them all — "As my Father hath sent me, so do I send you ; whose soever sins you remit they are remitted to them, and whose soever sins you retain ihey are retained !" — This was spoken, in sub- stance, repeatedly to them all. It is therefore asserting too much, to say that Peter alone was gifted with this power. He only used it first. They always exercised it in its true intent and meaning. I shall be glad to resume again the regular order. We have heard much about the bishops of Kome and how they can be traced back even to Peter, &c., &c. I wish my learned opponent would confine himself to the proposition in debate, and permit me to go through with this argument, for succession. Then I will show of how much value are the traditionary enumerations found in Eusebius, from whose authors I can make out two or three successions. The gentleman brings up the erudition of the 4th century. I would as soon call on people in this room for testimony that the battle of Bun- ker's hill, or Blenheim was so and so fought — noi one of whom lived at that time; as on persons living in one century to prove what hap- pened in centuries before they were born. In the fourth century there is one writer testifies to the succession. What a decisive proof ! Is there any testimony for the first ttuo hundred years affirming this suc- cession 1 I affirm that there is not. All the tradition on earth fails just in this radical and essential point! Again : tradition is wholly silent on the election of the first popes. No one pretends to tell how Peter and Linus and Clement were in- vested with the office. Tradition is even in the hands of Catholics ashamed to depose any thing upon this point. We all know how to dispose of tradition three hundred years too late, in other matters; and I think to the matter of fact people of this generation, it must appear preposterous to prove an event by those who lived one, two, and three hundred years after. Irenaeus was introduced as a witness of Peter's having been bishop of Rome : but Irenaeus does not say so on his own responsibility : for he lived at the close of the second century. With him it was only hear-say. Again, his testimony of the church of Rome, having been planted by Paul and Peter is certainly false; and his saying that Poly- carp was appointed bishop of Smyrna by the apostles, greatly weakens his traditionary statements concerning the Roman see: for Polycarp must have been ordained in the year 97, as he died in the year 147, having been 50 years bishop of Smyrna. Consequently it was impos- sible he could have been ordained by the apostles : but of this again. While my opponent speaks so fluently of early fathers, and of the short interval of two or three hundred years from Christ, he seems to forget how long a hundred years is, and how few know much about the events that happened a hundred years ago. Even now, in this age of books and printing, and steam presses, and steam-boats, and rail- roads, and general reading, how few of us could accurately, from me- mory relate the history of the American Revolution ! And yet the gen- tleman talks about the opportunities of a person to ascertain these his- eoma:? catholic keligiox. 115 toric facets, one or two hundred years after they occurred, from tradition too, in an age when all these facilities which we enjoy were unknown. Is not this tradition a very loose and uncertain witness ? — [Timo expired.] Twelve o'clock, M. Bishop Purcell rises — Irenaeus lived in the second- century. He was a disciple of Poly- carp, who was a disciple of John the evangelist. Irenajus, was bish- op of Lyons in France. The chain of testimony consists of three links. John the evangelist, Polj'carp of Smyrna, Irenaeus of Lyons. John told Polycarp what Jesus did — Polycarp told Irenaeus what John had told him, and Irenaeus hears testimony here. This edition was pub- lished by a Protestant divine, named Nich : Gallaius. It is dedicated to Grindalus, bishop of London ; and as I do not like to advance any thing merely on Catholic testimony, I prefer the Protestant to the Catholic edition of this father's works. Irenaeus distinctly says : " Since it would be very long to enumerate in this volume the succession of bish- ops in all the churches, by appealing to the tradition of a church the GREATEST AND MOST ANCIENT AND KNOWN TO ALL, which WaS found- ed and established at Rome, by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul ; a tradition which she has from the apostles, and the faith which she announces to men, and which comes down to us through the succession of bishops, we confound all those who in any way, either through evil self complacency or vain glory, or blindness and perversity gather otherwise than is meet. For with this church, on account of her more powerful principality, it is necessary that EVERY CHURCH AGREE, that is the faithful who are on all sides, in which church, the tradition of the apostles has been preserved by the faithful who are on all sides." Iren. lib. in. chap. 3, (adversus haere- ses.) Eusebius, has preserved for us a letter, written by the martyrs who suffered in Gaul, in the 19th year of Antonius Verus, and who were charged by the Pagans, as they say in their address to their fellow- citizens in Phrygia, "with feasts ofThyestes, {who ale pari of his own son,) and the incests of Qidipus, and such crimes as are neither lawful for us to speak nor to think, and such indeed, as we do not be- lieve were committed." In this document tlie martyrs commend Ire- naeus, then a presbyter of the ciiurcli of Lyons, to pope Elculherus, whom Irenaeus appealed to on the subject of the Quarto-deciman con- troversy. I have this letter here in Greek. It may perhaps havo more authority if I read the original. Thus do wo perceive that Eleulherua was styled "father and bishop of Rome," by these illustrious confessors of Jesus Christ, and his favor invoked in behalf of their brother. In book HI. chap. 3, (the title of this chapter is, of the apostolic tradition, or the succession of bishops in the churches from tiic apos- tles.) " These blessed apostles (Pelcr and Paul) founding and insti- tuting the churcji, delivered the care of administering it to Linus, of whom Paul makes mention in his epistle to Timothy. To liim suc- ceeded Anaclclus, after whom Clement obtains the episcopacy, in the third place from Ihf apostles, who had seen and conferred with tlio apostles, who had heard their preaching sounding in his ears, and had IIG DEBATE ON THE ■with his own eyes beheld their traditions. Nor was he the only one — there were many more yet living who had been taught by the apostles. Under this Clement, when no inconsiderable discussion occurred amonor the brethren at Corinth, the churcli of Rome addressed to them most forcible letters, gathering ll)em together in peace, repairing their failh, and announcing fo them the traditions they had recently receiv- ed from the apostles. To Clement succeeded Euaristus, and to Euaris- tus, Alexander; next was Sextus, sixth from the apostles, and after him Telesphorus, who also endured a most glorious martyrdom ; then Hyginus, afterwards Pius, and after him again Anicetus. But when Soter had succeeded Anicetus, now in the twelfth place from the apos- tles, Eleutherus hath the episcopate." There is then the fullest matii- festation that one and the same vivifying faith has been handed down in the church and preserved to the present day. I would fain read the rest of this admirable cliapter, but enough — here is the volume to which all who are anxious for more proof are invited to refer. Tertullian, a little later says, confounding the heretics of his day^ "let them produce the origin of their churches, let them display the succession of their bishops, so that the first may appear to have been ordained by an apostolic man, who persevered in their communion." Lib. de pra;scrip. He then enumerates the pontifts from St. Peter, to his own time in the Roman see, and concludes by the memorable words, " Let heretics exhibit any thing like this." The evidence of Eusehius is also before yorf. On this subject I have one remark to make, which no one in this assembly who sincerely desires to know the truth, and of such I trust, the number is not small, will hear with indifference. This is, that in the letter of Cornelius, bishop of Rome, to Fabius, bishop of Antioch concerning Novalus, which is given in full by Eusebius, and is a faithful exhibition of the doctrines of the whole church at that early period, there is not a single doctrine or usage mentioned, which is not taught and observed in the Catholic church in this very city, at this very hour. Is not this an admirable proof of the apostolicily of our cliurch 1 The supremacy of the pope in the supplying of vacant sees, the sacraments of the holy eucharist, baptism, confirmation, orders, a hierarchy, bishops, priests, deacons, subdeacons, acolytes, exorcists, readers, porters, or janitors; asylums for the needy and afflicted — one bishop in a Catholic church ; the right of excommunication, acquiescence of other bishops, personally testified or by letter, in the judgment of the bishop of Rome, &c. &c. &c. In the same letter we see heretics pictured to the life, the errors and evil practices of some modern sectarians described and strongly reprobated, viz : the forcing of communicants to take an oath never to quit a church they have joined. This I know to have occur- red in Maryland, and I presume it is not uncommon. Three o'clock P. M. Mr. Campbeij, rises — The last half hour of the gentleman was spent in culling antiquity to find some collateral evidence in attempting to defend the great point of the succession of pontiffs ; and with v/hat success you have all seen. His sensibility on the present occasion is truly gratifying. His con- duct here shows that he perceives it to be vital, supremely essential to his system to make Peterbishop of Rome, and to fix the first twen- noKAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 117 ty nine links in the apostolic chain. But the barrenness of ancient history cannot be remedied in the nineteenth century. He brought forward one fragment of antiquity on the subject; and it is the only fratnnent on which Eusebius himself relies. In truth that fragment, the° Latin version of Irensus, is the only fragment of antiquity now- extant, or extant in the time of Constantine, from which any thing can be gleaned on this subject. And he never once says that either Paul or Peter separately or jointly were bishops of the church of Roine ! And here again I cannot suppress my astonishment at the choice of the Romanists : — Why they did not make Paul rather than Peter bishop of Rome. In the first place he was a bachelor ; and that is now a most cardinal point : again, he informs us that " he had the care of all the churches." He says, moreover, that he is not behind the chief of the apostles. This is rather disrespectful of pope Peter ! It could be so easily proved, too, that he was once at Rome (though a prisoner for two full years.) Now, if he did not plant the church of Rome; he certainly watered it. He labored more abundantly than all the other apostles. Is it not then ten fold more probable that Paul ratlier than Peter was bishop of Rome'? But probability will not do in the case. We must have the strongest evidence : we must have contemporary testimony : we cannot prove a fact by witnesses who did not see it. We require the evidence of sense. We should not believe the records of Christ's actions, even, unless wc received them from eye and ear witnesses. To illustrate the difficulties that environ my ingenious opponent, I will suppose a case like the one he has to manage. Suppose that in the year one thousand, a tradition had been current that a certain bridge over the river Tiber had been built in the time of the apostles, and that Peter laid the corner stone of the Roman abutment. Some incredulous persons began then to doubt of the matter, and railed upon those who affirmed that Peter laid that stone to prove it. They go to work. They found very many believ- ing it in tlic 10th century : fewer in tlie 9th, fewer in tlie 8tli, fewer in'the 7th, till witliin 200 years of thf> time, they find only one person that affirms failli in it, and with him it is an unwritten tradition. All record ceases. Thire is a perfect chasm of 200 years without a sin- gle witness. Hftw shall tluy throw a bridge over this chasm? Where is tradition during this jjcriod ? Is there not one voiced Not ONE. But tlicy say it is only two hundred years ! But according to all the laws of mind and society, these two hundred years should have the most witnesses : for, the nearer wc approach any true event, the more numerous arr; the vouchers of its nrality and authenticity. Therefore tin; total failure of testimony during that period is fatal to the credibility of the tradition. But they say, it was traditionary for t^vo hundred years: but who can prove the tradition'? It is as hard to prove this tradition as the fact! To prove the existence of it first, and thi'u the aulhenticity of it afterwards, is only rising froni the po- sitive to the Kuporlalive tlitficnlty. W(! can as easily build a hous(! in the air eighteen stories high, leaving out the twf) basement stories, as prove thr- truth of an event 1800 years old, finding a chasm of 200 years in wliieh there is not one word about it. The church of Rome believes ni;iny miracles of her own on nu're tradition. There is a le- gend in Ireland to this day, commonly believtd, that St. I'atrick 1200 years ago literally sailed from that connlry to Scotland oti a millstone. Now, if we trace this back we shall find the evidence diminishes 118 DEBATE ON THE with every century until you come within two or three centuries of the time assigned. Then it comes to a solitary individual, who heard some one say, that he heard another one say, that such a t)ne dreamed so ! I think it would be well to advert more pointedly to that law of mind, that the testimony of a fact is always best and strongest be- cause of the number and opportunity of the witnesses at ike time, or near the time it actually existed. For example, at this day, there are many biographies of Washington and narratives of the revolutionary war ; some four or five hundred years hence there Vv'ill be but one or two. Tiiis is the established order of things. Genuine evidence diminishes as we descend from, and increases as we ascend up to the events, or facts recorded. All history is proof of this. It is a law of evidence, and a law of the human mind. Therefore, had Peter been bishop of Rome, we would, as we advanced upwards have found much more evidence of it than in the third and fourth centuries. But on the subject of tradition, I will gratify my audience with a few re- marks from Du Pin : certainly he had no temptation to weaken its au- thority. "Criticism is a kind of torch, that lights and conducts us, in the obscurs tracts of antiquity, by making us able to distinjfuish truth from falsehood, hisr tory from fable, and antiquity from novelty. 'Tis by this means, that in our times we have disengaged ourselves from an infinite number of very common errors into which our fathers fell for want of examining things by the rules of true criticism. For 'tis a surprising thing to consider how many spurious books we find in antiquity; nay, even in the first ages of the church. Several reeisons induced men to impose books upon the world, under other men's names. The first and most general, is, the malice of heretics; who, to give the great- er reputation to their heresies, composed several books, which they attributed to persons of great reputation; in which they studiousl}' spread their own er- rors, that so they might find a better reception, under the protection of these celebrated names-. And thus the first heretics devised false gospels, false acts, and false epistles of the apostles, and their disciples: and thus those that came after them published several spurious books, as if they had been written by or- thodox authors, that so they might insensibly convey their errors into the minds of their readers, without their perceiving the chf;at. The second reason that inclined people to favor books under other men's names, is directly contrary to the first; being occasioned by the indiscreet piety of some persons, who thought they did the church considerable service in forg- ing ecclesiastical or profane monuments in favor of religion and the truth. And this idea prevailed with some ancient christians to forge some testimonies in be- half of the christian religion, under the name of the Sibyls, Jilercurius Tris- megistus, and divers others: and likewise induced the Catholics to compose some books, that they might refute the heretics of their own times with the greatest ease. And lastly: the same motion carried the Catholics so far, a* to invent false histories, false miracles, andfalse lives of the saints, to keep up the piety of the faithful. . . The third reason of the forgery of some books, keeps a middle way between those we have already mentioned; for there have been some persons in the world, that have been guilty of this imposture, without any other design, than to divert themselves at the expense of their readers, and to try how nearly they could imitate the style of other men. Hence it is, that some authors have com- posed treatises under St. Cyprian's, St. Ambrose's and Si. Jlustin's names — • * * » * - desiring rather (as the Abbot of Billi says,) to ap- pear abroad, and be esteemed under other men's names than to continue despis- ed, and be buried in darkness, by writing in their own. And these are the rea- sons that may have occasioned tlie forgeryof books; malice, indiscreet piety, and the humors of men. But besides these reasons that have advanced this trade of forgery, there are ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 119 seTeral others that have occasioned the setting- authors' names to several books, which they never writ. 'Tis very ill clone to conclude that such a book is spurious, because it pinch- es us, and afterwards to starch for reasons why it may be thought so." [Pj-e- face,p. G, 7. We select only one of all these judicious and weighty remarks, from one of the most learned of Roman Catholics, viz. '■'■that the Cath- olics themselves have invex\ted false histories, false miracles, and FALSE LIVES OF THE SAINTS," to promote piety in their own members, from which I emphatically ask the question : What is an article of {'aith worth which is founded alone upon the traditions of that church?! will only add, these are the words of Du Pin, a learned and authen- tic ecclesiastical historian, whose work is published by the authority of the learned doctors of the Sorbonne. I have, let me now add, strong suspicions of tlio authenticity of that passage of Irenasus. The Greek original in the first place is lost: and in the second place the Latin translation was not found for some hundreds of years afterwards. In the third place, two things asserted by Irenaeus are not true: 1st, that Peter and Paul founded the Roman church ; whereas it has been shown by Paul's letter to the Romans, not to have been the case. 2d. This same Irenaeus says, that Polycarp was ordained by the apostles, when according to Poly- carp himself, he was not ordained till the year 97, when all the apos- tles were dead save John, and there is no document to prove that even John lived till that time. Thus dispose we of Roman traditions. The gentleman first introduced this authority which I have in my hand — an Episcopalian doctor — one of the most learned authors of the nresent day, George Waddington — " History of the Church, 1834." This author enumerates the bishops of Rome; but listen to his own candid testimony. In his chronological table of eminent men, and of the principal councils, he says : " The succtFsion of the earliest Bishops of Rome and the duration of their go- vornment, arc involved in intxplicablc confusion." But I have here before me tho Romanorum Poniificum Index — a chronological index of the Roman pontiffs, prefixed to Eusebius. I have compared it for the first two centuries with Eusebius and some of the primitive fathers, on whose authority it partially rests, and I can say with confidence there is no faith can be reposed in it. I find the authorities on which its assertions rest sometimes obscure, frequently contradictory, and often at variance with other facts which they assert; involving the credibility of the whole story of the successions from diff"erent chairs. There are the following tradilions to be collected from Eusebius and his fathers for only the first five links of this chain : \st. Lineage. 2nd. Lineage. 3rd. /lineage. 4th. Lineage. 1- I'etfr. 1. Linus. 1. Tetcr. 1. Ptter. 2. Litim. 2. Anaclclus. 2. Annclclus. 2. Clement. 3- ('\'-lui. -.i. fUnient. 3. Clement. 3. LinuM. 4. Clement. 4. .Sixtus. 4. .Mexandcr. 4. CIctus. 5. Ana< Ictus. 5. Al(xand(r. 5. Kvaristu-'. 5. Alexander. I might argue this suhject for hours and hours, but it is not worth it, I do not like to imilalo my opponent in dilating upon inatters,which, whether true or false, do notnlfcct tho points at isstie tho weight of a fea- ther. But the display we have now made of the hi'ginning of sncces- sion, according to various traditions and stalriiimts, is susceptible of immediate proof, and shows how vacant and dubious these oral and 120 DEBATE ON THE hearsay traditions are. Is not Waddington justified in saying "/Ai's ■mailer is involved in inexplicable confusion?'''' and well it is that saving faith depends not upon such testimony ! I have said the Romanists have never been uniform in electing their popes. I can show some six or seven different modes of filling the chair of Peter, equally approved by the church of different ages. The chair has often been filled by bribery, by force, by the bayonet, and by all sorts of violence. It has been filled by men and boys, and by all sorts of characters. But of this more fully at an- other time. The gentleman remarked, on Saturday, that the pope is not infalli- ble. The question was not about the man, but the pope. I take him at his word, and will now prove, that neither the present pope nor his predecessors are successors of Peter; because Peter was infallible, both in doctrine and in discipline. How, then, can these fallible gentry — these fallible popes — be successors to Peter, in the capa- city of officers, when they have not the grace of office, — my opponent himself being judge? I shall now attempt continuously to show, that if even Peter had been placed by a positive precept in the office of vicar and head of the church, all the official grace of such an appointment has failed by the Tarious schisms in the Roman see. The chain has been broken ; for Roman Catholics themselves admit, at least, twenty-two schisms ; some count twenly-six. Protestants can find twenty-nine. I have al- ready shown that the hook and the first link must be better secured, if not welded ; for Peter the hook and first link has not yet been fas- tened to the right place ; and some of the first links are so entangled that Eusebius, the pope, and C. Waddington, cannot strengthen them. And to quote the words of .4. Pope, not the pope, if one link be missing, " 2\nih or ten ihousnadllt breaks the chain alike." Ah me ! I am jostled out of my course again ! The mention of Eusebius reminds me that the bishop has quoted him against the No- vatians, &c. But what avails the testimony of Eusebius as a sectary? It is quoting a Jansenist against a Jesuit — a Calvinist against an Ar- minian — a Romanist against a Protestant. Eusebius speaks as a his- torian, and he speaks as a sectary; sometimes Arian, perhaps, some- times Trinitarian ; but certainly opposed to Novatus and his party. It is very hard for a warm partizan, in any case, to state his opponent's views fairly. I have never yet heard any one oppose Calvinism, or Arminianism, just precisely as it was. There is some little difference or other in the most equitable hands, which the opposite party would not have stated just so ; and we know how often the merits of contro- versy rests upon these minute matters. Novatus and Cornelius were both elected bishops of Rome, and a controversy arose on their respec- tive claims. In the course of the controversy, we learn, that it turned on these two points: " That Cornelius admitted (hose who had been guilty fif Idolatry to communion; and Novatus taught that the church neither could nor ought to admit those to the communion that bad apostatized." Uu Fin. Vol. I. p. 135. Novatus was the rival of his friend Cornelius, and he regards him as an anti-pope; he is, indeed, called anti-pope 1st. And, at this day, we cannot tell whether Novatus or Cornelius was the successor of Peter! So the first schism commenced, and we look for the faithful E03LVN CATHOLIC EKLIGIOX. 121 witnesses against Roman assumption from that hour amongst the Re- monstrants — call them the Novatians, Puritans, or Protestants. The second schism we shall notice is that between Liberius and Felix, A. D. 367, " Constaiitius being enraged against St. Alhanasius, as supposing him the cause of that enmity which his brother Constans had against him, Liberius as to this answered wisely, jou ought not, sir, to make use of bishops to revenge your quarrels ; for tlie hands of eccltsiastics ought not to be employed, but only to bless and lo sanctify. At last Constantius threatened him with banishment ; 'I have already,' says he, ' bid adieu to my brethren at Rome, for the ecclesiastical laws are to be preferred before my living there.' Three days time were given him to consider of it, and because he did not change his opinion in that time lie was banished two days after to Berea a city of Thrace. The emperor, the em- press, and the eunuch F.usebius, offered him money to bear the expenses of his journey, but he refused it, and went away cheerfully to the place of his banish- ment. The clergy of Rome having lost their iiead, took an oath to choose no- body in the room of Liberius as long as he was alive ; but Constantius. by the management of Epictetus bishop of Centumcellar in Italy, procured one Felix a deacon lo be ordained bishop, who was himself also one of them that had sworn not to choose a bishop in the room of Liberius « * » But Liberius, who had given proof of so great constancy in time of peace, could not long endure the tediousness of banishment ; for before he had been two years in it, he suffer- ed himself to be over persuaded by Demophilus bishop of that city, of which he was banished, and did not only subscribe the condemnation of St. Athanasius ; but he also consented to an heretical confession of faith."— £>« Fin. Vol. L p. 190. Now, if we take Liberius for the true pope, we must take an Jrian head; for it must be acknowledged that he subscribed the heretical and Ariaii creed ; and, perhaps, at this time the majority of the Roman Catholic church were Arians ; but that is not the present inquiry. We shall now read an account of the third schism : D.VM.ASUS, BISIIcr OF ROME. '• After the death of pope Liberius, which happened in the year 369, the see of Rome being vacant for some time, by reason of the cal)alling "of those that pre- tended to fill it, Daniasiis at last was' chosen by the greater part of the clergy and people, and ordained by the bishops. But on the other side, Ursimis, or rather Ursirinus, who was his conipctitor for the popedom, got himself ordained by some otlu.r bishops in the church of Sicinus. This coiitest caused a great division in the city of Rome, and stirred up so great a sedition there as could hardly be appeased. 'J'he two jjarties came from words to blows, and many christiang were killed in the churches of Rome upon this quarri 1. The governor of Rome called J'rfrtcilus, bt ing desirous to allay the heat of this contention, sent IJrsir.iiws into banishment by the emperor's order: but his bonishment did not p< rfertly appease the cpinrrel; for the partizans of Ursicinus assembled still in llie rhurchcs ofwhich they were possessed, without ever com- municating with Diimasiis; and even when'the emperor had ordered that their churches gfioiild lietakf n from them, they ^till kejilui) their assenil)lie8 without the city, 80 that it was necessary at la^t to (Irive them rpjite out of Rome. And yet all this did not hinder Ursirinus from having his secret associates in Italy and at Rome. The bishop of PnUoli calhd Flornitius, and th<. bishoj) of I'arma wern most zealous for his interests. Tliey were rondemned in a council held at Rome in the year. '$72, and afterwards banished by thf authority of the emperor. How- ever tnry found means to return into ttuir own country, and stirred up new troubles there. They got pope Dnmasus to be arciiseif by one hanr, a Jew. This arciisntion was examined in a council of bishops liehi at Rome, in tlie yrar 378, which dfclp.rrd Dnmasus innocent of the crime that was laid to his cliiirge. This council wrote a litter to the emperor (iratinn, praying him to lake somo order for the pence of Ihi- church r,f Rome. 'I he »iii|)eror wrote It. them, that Ursicinus was detained at Colofrne, tlmt he had given ordi r to banish f.innr in- to a corner of Spain^ and to force the bishops ol I'liteoli and rarnin, out f.f their country. This flifl not hinder Untirinns from returning into Italy in the year 381, where he stirred up new tumult*, and endeavored to pre-engage the empe- ror: but the bishops of Itahj being assembled in a council at Afiuilcia, in tbo L IG 122 DEHATi; ox Tin; year 381, wrote to smartly to him, tlint he banished LVj/cini/s forcvtr, and left Damastis in praccablf pos^session ot" the sec of Rome, in wliich lie continued un- til the year 384." Du Pin. Vol. I. p. 22G, 2-27.— [Time expired.] Half past 3 o'clock, P. M. Bisiicp Pt'RCELi. rises — In the 2nd. century lived Tortnlliau — a priest in Africa. He showed how clear was the chain of tradition — he says distinctly that Peter was bishop of Rome. I am g^ointr to (luole another splendid passage from his testimony. But first let me ask, how could a massive, an enormous volume like this (holdings it up) of which the zeal of the early Christ- ians, has made so many copies ; and a portion of which, the admirable apologetic, or del'ence of our Christian ancestors, was addressed to the Pagan Emperors, have been vitiated'? It was spread over the whole world — it was read with avidity by Christians and heathens. It is authentic history and based on testimony far more credible than we possess of the genuineness of Homer, or Horace, of Tacitus, or Cicero. We could not believe any fact of history, not even our title to our houses and other goods and chattels, without admitting it. How else but by such records, do we know with certainty of events of which our senses have not taken cognizance, of which we have no personal knowledge, that a few years ago we fought a hard battle with England and gained our independence ? That our general was named Wasliington, and that he was aided by La Fayette 1 Comparatively recent as these events be, they are matters of tradition! and tradition is but another name for history. Admit my learned opponent's principle, and the world will be turned to|)sy-turvy. We cannot be sure of any thing. I now cite Tertullian; and mark, I pray you, the clearness and force of his reasoning in the following syllogism, for apostolical succession. Ttrtullian de praescriptione adveisiis liitTeticos, lib. p. 391. " If the LorilJtsus Chrijt sent his apastles to preach, no other preachers are to be received than those whoin he coniinissioned : for no" one knows the Father but the Son. and they to whom the Son hath revealed him, nor is the Son seen to have reveal- ed him to any others than the apostles, whom he sent to preach what he reveal- ed to them. Now what they preached, that is to say, vvnat Christ revealed to them, I will here lay down as a principle (hie prffiscribam) cannot be otherwise proved than by the same churches which the apostles, themselves, founded, by preaching to them, themselves, both by word ot mouth, as they say, and, after- wards, by their epistles. If this be so, it is therefore plain that all the doctrine which agrees with these apostolic churches, the malriccs and originals (or exem- jjlars) of faith, is to be reputed true, as undoubtedly, holding that which the churches received from the apostles, the apostles from Christ, and Christ from God : but that all other doctrine is to be prejudged false, as teaching contrari- Iv to the churches and to the apostles, to Christ and to God. All, therefore, tliat remains now to be done is to demonstrate that the doctrine we preach, as already explained, has been handed down to us from the apostles, and thus con- vict all other doctrines of t'alsehood "They, (the heretics) object that Peter was reprehended by Paul. But let those who make this allegation shew that Paul preached a dilferent gospel from what Peter preached and the other apos- tles. If Peter was rejjrehentled for withdrawing, through human respect, from intercourse with the (jentiles, with whom he previously associated, this was a fault of conduct (conversationis) not of preaching. He did not, on this account, preach a different God from the Creator, a different Christ from the son of Ma- ry, a different hope from that of the resurrection — and, (to refute these here- tics,) I will answer as it were for Peter, that I'aul, himself, said that he made himself, all things to all men, a Jew to the Jews, and no Jew to those who were no Jews, that he may gain all. So that Paul repreljended, under certain cir- cumstances, in Peter, what he, himself, under certain circumstances, did." KOMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 123 But I might read the whole book of prescriptions by TertuUian against heretics. The fish story again — here is Henry's exposition of the Bible. The principal meaning, in his view, is that which I have given. Could Paul, my friends, claim to be the chief of the apostles? Ho had probably done more than any man then living against Christianity, until prostrated by anger and mercy, on the road to Damascus. " Saul, Saul, wliy persecutest thou me" changed him from a wolf to a lamb, from a persecutor to an apostle. Eusebius informs us that Paul of Samosata, was deposed bj' a coun- cil in consequence of the heresy introduced by him at Antioch, of wiiich a detailed account had been rendered b3'the council to Dionysius, bish- op of Rome. Paul being unwilling to leave the building of the church, "an appeal was made to the emperor Aurelian, who decided most equitably on the business, ordering the building to be given up to those whom the christian bishops of Rome and Italy should write." Another Pagan, Ammianus Mnrccllinus, giving an account of the persecution raised by the emperor Constantius against the famous patriarch of Alexandria St. Atlianasius, tells us that this emperor strove hard to procure the condemnation of Atlianasius by Liberius, on account of the supreme authority enjoyed bj' the bishops of the Roman see." " Even from the mouths of l)abes and sucklings," says the Scriptures, " hath God made perfect praise." I may observe, tliat he has extorted testimony from Pagan kings and historians, to prove the authority of the bishop of Rome ihronghoul the Christian world. My friend has introduced the subject of unity, in connection with tradition. We shall argue that, if he ])ieases, from the Bible ; but in the mean time let us hear Cyprian, a bishop of Carthage, in Africa, on this subject, in the .'5J. century. I am bold to say, you have never heard argument stronger, illustration more apposite, or language more beautiful, than what this father employs. Cvpriaii. (Ic Uiiitatc l-lcclesia: Ciitholic;:', [). 181, ami Di: Siinplici Prros. The primacy isgiv<:n to I'rtfcr that the church and thi: c!i;iir of Christ may be shewn to be out. And all tlu: apo<-(l(:s and sheplitrds, but tht-rc is seen but one; (lack, fed by all the npoiitlt-s with unanimous consent ; can he who holdcth not thin unity, believe he liolds the faith ? Can hf who resists and opposes tlic church, who forsakes the chair o( I'eter, on whicli the church was founded, flat- ter iiinisclf that he is in the cliurch, while the apostle Paul t<;aches the same thing and shews the sacrament of unity, saying-, "ONF, noDY A.vn ONE SPiliiT, ONK HOPE OK VOLR VOfATION, ONF. 1,0111), ONE FAITH, O.NF, ItAI'TISAI, ONF. God." Let no man decejvr: the brotln rliood by a lie ; let no inaji, by perfidi- ous ))revarications corrupt the truth of faith ! The e])iscopacy is one, lach se- parate part Ijeinj^ consolidated in one. 'I'hc church too is one, with btxiiriniit fertility extending- her branihes throughout. As tiiere are many rays of light, but no more than one sun, many branc-lieH, but only one truidi, held fast in tin-. earth by its tenacious root, many btreams pushing from one fountain, but all blendecl in their source. Sever a ray from the sun, the unity o( light sutlers no dividion ; break a brHiich from the tree, the liroken branch will l)ud no more, cut off n stream from the source, the severed stream will dry up. ."^o liki-vviso the church, irrndialeil with the light of the Lord, ditluses her rays throughout the universe. 'I'he light, however, which is every where dilTused is one, nor is the unity of the body separated. She spreads her eopiuus slrianis, but tliere is one head, one origin, one blessed mother with a numerous jirogeriv. We arc her offspring, we are nourished with her milk, we are imimaled witli her spirit. He ran no huiger have Cod for his tiither, who has not the < hurrh for his moth- er. If any one out of the nrk of iN'oe njuld lace! Their rock in not as our rock, our enemies themselves being jn Iges. Without doubt, Chri-t himself the rock— and tried founflation of the church, and woe be to him who altenipts to lay any other, lb. If then, MaUliew Henry is good authority on one point he is good on the other. L 2 120 DEBATE OX THK Bishop Oley of Tennessee has l)erii unceremoniously drat^gcd into this controversy. He is a f]^entleman I'or whom I entertain a very high regard : and while we difier on some questions, concerning dio- cesan episcopacy, we perfoctljf ao;ree on the import of 'it^t/c (Hi(>rus) a priest, as applied to christians, lie has no idea, more than myself of a christian hicrus, or priest ollering sacrifices for sins on earth. He has not answered, indeed, seven letters addressed to him by myself on bishop Onderdonk's tract on diocesan episcopacy : but yet it is not too late. We expect one of these bishops to reply to them. The Roman Catholics alone contend that priests, by whicii they mean an order of clergy, can offer sacrifice for sins. Nay, indeed, Mr. Hughes in his controversy with Mr. Breckenridge, says, " To oiler sacrifice is the chief official business of the priests." p. 288. Hence, we learn that even in this enlightened land and 19th century, there are persons amongst us claiming the power of making sin offerings and expiating and forgiving sins !! We now resume the history of schisms in the succession : We last read you the contentions and havoc of human life on the succession of Damasus. The emperor at that time decided the con- troversy by banishing Ursinus, and on the decision of that emperor now rests the faith and salvation of the Roman church — themselves being judges. And yet, my learned opponent, in some of his speeches, affects to tell you that emperors have nothing to do, — no right to in- terfere in councils, or with church officers ; and here, and on numer- ous occasions, we find them filling Peter's chair, making vicars of Christ, and heads for his church !! We cannot rehearse all the schisms, and sliall therefore give only a specimen. We take another instance of an imperial pope — one of an emperor's creation. " After the dtath of pope Zozimus, tlie cluii-ch of Home was divided about the election of his successor. The archdeacon iMjlalius, who aspired to the bishopric of Rome, shut himself up in the church of the Lateran, with part of the people, some priests, and some deacons, and made them choose iiim in Zozimus' room. On the other side a great number of priests, several bisiiops, and part of the people, being assembled in the church of Theodora, elected Boniface. Both were ordained; Kulalius was ordained by some bishops, aujong whom was the bishop of Ostia, who used to ordain the bishop of Rome. Honifqce was likewise ordained by a great number of bishops, and went to take possession of St. Peter's church. Svmmachus, governor of Rome, having tried in vain to make them agree, writ to tne emperor llonorius about it. In his letter of the 29th of December, 418, he speaks in Eulalius' behalf, and judges Boniface to be in the wrong. The emperor believing his relation, sent him word immediately that he should expel Boniface and upliold Eulalius. The governor liaving received this order, sent for Boniface to ac(|uaint him with it, but he would not come to him, so that the governor sent to him to signify the emperor's order, and kept liim from re- turning into the city. The bishops, priests, and the people that sided with Boniface, wrote immediately to the emperor to entreat him that he would order both Kidalius and Bonijhce to go to court, that their cause might there be "udged. To satisfy them, the emperor sent to Si/iianachus an order of 30th of anuar_v, 419, signifying that lie should enjoin Jionifice and Kulalius to be at Ravenna about the 6lh oi February, llonorius convened some bishops thither to judge of their cause; and that they might not be suspected of favoring any one side, he commanded that none of those who had ordained either of them, should be a judge in the case. The bisiiops that were chosen to judge this cause being divided, the emperor put ofi' the judgment till May, and forbade Kulalius nnd Boniface to go to Rome; and sent thither .'3 c/(t7/n/s, bishop fjf Upoltto, to perform the Episcopal functions during the KasUr holydays ; in J ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGIOX. 127 which time he prepared a nunierous synod, and invited the bishops both o( ji^rica and Gaul; but Eulalius could not endure that delay, and spoiled his business by his impatience; for whether he distrusted his ri^ht, or whether he was of a restless temper, he returned to JRonie the IGth o( March, and would have staid there notwithstanding the emperor's orders, which obliged Symmachus to use \ioknce to drive him out of Rome; and the emperor having- been informed of his disibedience, waited fjr no other judgri.ent, but caused Boniface to be put in posses-ion in the beginning of April, 419." — Lhi Pin, vol. I. p. 417. The Holy Spirit, then, by tiie emperor Hoiiorius, — an Jn'ati, too, (if I recollect right,) establishes a vicar for Christ in the person of IJoniface I. What, says bishop Purcell, have emperors to do \vith Christ's church ? ! Once, then they had a great deal to do with it; and where is infallibility now 1 Next comes pope Symmachus. Again the church's head is the fruit of bloodshed and war. '• After the death of pope ,/lnastasitis, which liappcn<(l at the end of the year 498, there was a fierce contention in the church of Rome between L,au- rtnliiis aiid Symmachus, which of them two was duly promoted to that see. Sym- jiiachus who was deacon, was chosen, and ordained by the far greater number; Ijut F':iius a Roman Senator, who had jiromised the Emperor Anastasius, that his edict of agreement with the bishop of Rome should be signed, procured Laiirentius to be chosen and ordained. This schism divided the church and the city of Rome, and the most eminent both of the clergy and the senate took part with one of these two bishops: but at length both, parties agreed to wait upon King Thcodoric at Ravenna for his decision in the case, udiich was this, That he shntitj coniiniie bishop (if Rome, n-ho had been Jirsl chosen, and should be found to have thejitr greater number of voices for him. Symmachus had the advantage of Laiirentius on both these accounts, and so was confirmed in the possession ol the holy see, and he ordained Lnurenlivs bishop of J^~ocera, if we may believe Anastasius. At the beginning of the next year he called a. council, wherein he made a canon against the ways of sohcitin"- nuns' voices, which were then used for obtaining the pa)5al dignity : but those who o[)])Osed the ordination of Symmachus, seeing hnn possi ssi-d of the holy see against their mind, used all their endeavours to turn him out of it, for x\hich end they diarged him with many crimes, they stirred up a part of the people and senate against him, and caused a petition to be presented to king 7'heodoric, that he ^\ould aj)poiiit a delegate to luar the cause. He named I'eter bishop of ..lllinas, who dejjosed the pope from the government of his diocese, and deprived him of the possessions of the church. This division was the cause of so great disorders in Rome, that from words they came many tin)es to blows, and every day produced lighting and iimrders: many ecclesiastics were beaten to death, virgins were robbed, and driven away from their haljitation, many lay-men were wounded orkilliul, insomuch that not only the church, but also the city of Rome sulfered very much by this schism. King 'I'licodoric being ties irons to put an end to these disorders, called a council; wherein the bishop being, possessed with a good o|iinion of Pope Syuiaclivs, would not enter upon lln^ examination of the particulars albgid against him, but only- declared him innocent before his accusers, of the crinjes that were laid to Ins charge: and they |)revailed so far by their importunity, that the king was satisfied with tills sentence, and both the ])i:o\>\i: and the senate who had l)een very much irritated against Symmaclins, were pacified, and ncknowhdged him for pope. Yet sonic of the discontentfcl party still remained, who drew up a \vriting against the Synod and .npread their cnliiimiies, forged against .Sipnmaclius, as far as the east. 'I'lie einjttrvr .Inaslusius obji'cted them to hnn, which obliged .S'i/m»;i«cA//.? to write a litter to him for his own vindication; but notwithstanding these elVorls of his I nemic», he rontiniied in possession of the holy si e until the yi ar ."ill win rein le died." I)u I'm. \ol. I. p. 5.27. If we cannot find (Jlirisl's church some where out ol tlic Uoniaa church at this time, we shall have a hard task to find her there ! Again, we shall read a few words concerning I'oniface II. " Jjonifiicc, the sci ond of thai nnmc-, the fir^l pope o(t tie nal ion o( the (iolht, wan promoted lo the holy see, under the reign of king Ahiri'iiH on the I'llii (lay of Oc- tober, in the year 5J9. At the tame time one part of the chrgy chose Dioscorus 128 DEBATE ON THK who was formerly one of tlic tlcputics sent into the east by Hormisdas. Honiface was ordaini'd in the churcli of Jnlius, ;\n(l Diosconis in that of Constantine. 15ut this last died the 12th day of iVovoinbcr. Honiface seeing; himself left in sole possession used his utmost endeavors to bring over those who had been of the other party: he threatened thi ni with an aiuithenia, and forced lh(;m to subscribe. He called together the clergy, anil condemned the memory of Dioscorus, accusing him of simony. He proceeded yet further, and, as if it were not enough for him to be secured of the noly see for himself, he would also appoint himself a suc- cessor, and having called a synod, he engaged the bishops anci clergy by oalh, and under their hands, that they should choose and ordain in his room the deacon Vigilius afterhis death. This being against the canons, he himself acknowledged publicly his fault, and burned the yvriting which he extorted from them." Du Pin. Vol. I." p. 542. What an excellent head, truly, for the church of Christ ! "We shall next see, that other women besides queen Elizabeth, whom my opponent denounces for being head of the English church, had something to do in pope manufacturing. — Pope Sylverius and pope Vigilius come next: "The deacon Vigilius remained at Constantinople after the death of Agapetus, who had for a longtime aspired to the bishopric, and made use of this occasion to get himself promoted to it. He promised the empress, that if she would make him pope he would receive Theodosius, Authimus, and Severus into his connuunion, and that he yvould approve their doctrine. The empress not only promised to make him pope, but also offered him money if he would do what she desired. Vigilius having given the empress all the assurances that she could wish, departed with a secret order addressed to Bellisarius to make him success- ful in his design. Vigilius being come into Italy, found all things well prepared for him, the siege of Rome was raised when he arrived there, but during the siege Silverius was suspected to hold correspondence with the Goths, and so he was rendered odious for refusing expressly to accept the empress's proposals of receiving Authimus. Thus Vigilius having delivered to BelPisarius the order which he brought, and having promised him two hundred pieces of gold over and above the seven hundred which he was to give him, found no great difficulty to persuade him to drive away Silverius." **»*■* " This was put in execution, be yvas delivered to the guards of Vigilius, and fie was banished into the Isles of Ponticnna and Panctataria, which were over against the mount Cirrellus, where he died of a famine in great misery, if we may believe Liberatus. Procopius, in his secret historj, seems to insinuate, that he was killed by one named F.ugenius, a man devoted to Antonina — the wife of Bellisarius: but what Procopius says, may be understood not of the death of Silverius, but ratherof his accusation or apprehension." ««*» ***** * " Although Vigilius was promoted to the see of Rome, by a way altogether unjust, yet he continued in the possession of it after the death of Sdverius, and was acknowledged for a lawful pope, without proceeding to a new election, or even confirming that which had been made. The conduct which he had observ- ed during this pontificate answered well enough to its unhappy beginning. He had at first approved the doctrines of Authimus, and that of the Acephali, to sat- isfy the empress: but the fear of being turned out by the people of Rome, whom he hated, made him c|uickly recall this approbation; yet he did not, by this, gain the hearts of the Roman». They could not endure an usurper, who having been thecause of the death of their lawful bishop, would abuse them ^o. They accused him also, of having killed his secretary with a bloyv of his Bt, and of having whipped his"! sister's son till he died. The empress who was not satis- fied with him because he had gone back from his word, sent Authimus to Rome with an order to bring him into Greece, and at his departure the people gave him all sorts of imprecations.'' Ih. Vol. I. pnfcc 552. We shall only at this time give the details of another column of the history of the popes in the work before us. It speaks for itself — tells how all the evil passions of human nature co-operated in the election and creation of Christ's vicars. ROJIAN CAXnOLIC RELIGION. 129 Under head — " An account of the popes, and of the church of Rome, from the time of Sylvester II. to Gregorj- V'll. 'After his death there was a schism in the church of Rome; between £enedicl V'lII. son to Gregory, the count of Frcscati, who was first elected by his father's interest; and one Gregory, who was elected by some Romans, who outed Benedict. He fled to Henry, king of Germany, who immediately raised forces, and marched into Italy to re-establish him. As soon as the king arrived, Gregory fled for it, and Benedict was re- ceived without any opposition. He conferred the imperial crown on that prince, and on queen Chunegonda his wife. Benedict died in the year 1034, and some authors say, that after his death he appeared mounted on a black horse, and that he showed the place where he had deposited a treasure, that so it might be dis- tributed to the poor, and that by these alms, and the prayers of St. Odilo, he was delivered from the torments of the other life. We have only one Bull of bis, in favor of the Abby of Cluny." " The count oi J-'rcsrad, that the popedom might be still in his family, caused his other son to be elected in the room of Benedict VIII. though he was not then in orders. He was ordained and called John, which, according to us, is the eighteenth of that name, but according to others the twentieth. 'Tis said, that some time after this pope being sensible that his election was vicious and simo- niacal, he withdrew into a monastery there to sufler jjenance, and that he forbore performing any part of his function, till such time as he was chosen again by the clergy." "John X^'III. dying Novr. 7, in the year 1033, Aiberi count of Frescati,caus- «d his son to be seated on St. Peter's chair. He was nephew to the two last popes the tount's brothers, and was not above eighteen years of age at the most. He changed his name of Thophylact into that of Benedict IX. Peter Darnien, speaks of him as a man that lived very disorderly, and was very unworthy of that dignity to which he had been advanced by the tyranny of his father. However, he enjoy*-d the popedom very quietly for ten years together; but at last the Romans, weary of his abominable irregularities, outed him, and put up in his place, the bishop of St. Sabina, who took ujjon him the name of Sylvester III. He enjoyed his dignity but three months; for though Benedict voluntarily resigned the popedom, yet he returned to Rome, and with the assis- tance of Fnscati's party, drove out his competitor, and re-assumed the papal chair. But being altogether uncapable of govf ruing it, and having nothing more in- his thoughts than the gratifying of his brutal appetite, he made a bargain about the popedom with John Graciuii, archbishop of the church of Rome, and made it over to him for a sum of money, reserving to himself the revenues due from England to the holy see. This Gracian took upon him the name of Gregory VI. In the meantime, kuig Henry, who had succeeded his futiier, Conrad, in the year 1039, being incensefrBgaiiiwt Benedict, who hod sent the imperial crown to the king of Huneary, after he had deflated that prince, resolved to march into Italy to nut an end to that schism. After he came thitlier ho caused these three popes to be deposed in several synods as usurpers, simonists, and criminals. Bcnetfict fled for it ; Gregory VI. was apprehended and afterwards banislied; and Sylves- ter III. was sent back to his bishopric of St. Sabina. He caused Suidger, bishop of Hamberg, to be elected in their stcid, who took upon him the name of Cle- ment 11. and wa.t acknowledged a^ lawful po|)e by all the world. He crowned Henry emperor, and as he vvaa wniliiig upon hiiii home toGermany. died beyond the Alps, October 7, in the year 1017, niin^ months after his elrctioJi. Inimedi- ately upon this, Benedict IX. returns to Rome, and a third time remounts the papal chair, which he held for eight months, notwithstanding the j nipcror had •enl from Germany !'i)p|io, biihopof Bresse. who was consecrated pope under the title of 9feniaHui ll. but he dirians. But in every case of doubt as to scripture, or ecclesiastical hisldry, the tests of snnnd criticism must be applied, and then the sibyls and the MercuriusTris- megistus are sure to go overboard. " Opiniotutm commcnia delct dics,^* says Cicero, ^* natur.y judiria ronjirmnf.^^ I'inic. exposes falsehood — and confirms truth. What (Cicero says time does, a more rcKperlablo agent, tlm fbiirob, has achieved — she has selected the genuine hooks of scripture and stamped fortjery upon such as were spurious. Had she not done this wher» would have bccu tho Bible] Thcru are other 132 DEBATE OX THE ways of detecting error — Dn Pin has told you of them. "A third class," says lie, "forge for their diversion." You have all heard of the late prodigious humbug at KxetiT Hall, England. The king suppresses the Orange lodges. Tlio bigots of llio nation rally. They invite a general convention of their brother bigots throughout the empire; a champion, it was the notorious Dr. McGheo, is invited from Ireland. He pro- fesses to have discovered a document penned by the reigning pontiff, and addressed to the clergy of England and Ireland, that recommended all the crimes that could be thought, of to be committed against the Protestants. The crowd is gathered. The conquering hero comes. The air is vexed with the cries of "down with the Catholics," — "long life to McGhee !" He opens his mouth, but he cannot speak. His emo- tions overpower him — .some broken accents — the title of the document is heard. " Simpleton," says a tremulous voice from the crowd, " the Rev. Mr. Todd, of Trinity college, Dublin, forged and published that document for his own diversion and that of his friends, just to see how he could imitate the pope's Latin, but never dreaming that any man of sense could believe that he intended to impose it on the world as a genuine production of the pope!" McGhee was thunderstruck— the meeting horrified, and one by one they slunk away to their homes, muttering benedictions upon Irish bull-makers! This was diverting; but the consequences of such diversions were not always as harmless to ihe poor Catholics; in fact they had frequently cost them torrents of blood. The celebrated Dr. Parr, Dr. Johnson, Nix, Whittaker, all agree that the Catholic is the most calumniated society on earth. My friend should know that the Latin translation of Irenaeus is good authority, according to the soundest rules of criticism. It was made in the lifetime of Irena;us. who wrote the preface to it himself ; by birth a Greek, he was bishop of a Latin see, (Lyons,) and he says he hopes the reader will excuse the roughness of his style, for he had been so long among the Celtaj that he had lost the purity of his native tongue. His proximity to the apostles is proof of the clearness of the testimony in his day. Polycarp was converted in the year 80 — and St. John lived to the close of the first century — so that John taught Polycarp, and Polycarp taught Ironaeus. We all know why Jacob (supplanter,) Sara (Lady,) Isaac, (laughter,) Peter, (a rock,) were so called — was there a reason for the giving of these names to all but Peter"? The reason my friend alleges is no/ it ,- Peter was not the first convert, it was his brother brought him to Christ. John i. 41, 42. The word head is figurative; this remark cuts up the web of sophistry my friend has spun around it. The pope is Peter's suc- cessor without being all and every thing that Peter was, without being a fisherman, a swordsman, a man of impulsiveness, a martyr. He succeeds to all the power necessary to guide the church. The other apostles were infallible, as my friend admits, and yet their successors claim not to be so, individually; it is enough for every purpose of good government that they are so when they abide in the doctrine of the entire church. Liberius never erred in faith ; and Du Pin himself is proof of his orthodoxy. He defended the faithful Atlianasius against Constantius and the Arians his accusers ! And yet Mr. C. would have us believe Liberius an Arian ! He preferred, he said, to go into exile rather than break the ecclesiastical laws against his own consci- ence. Is not this one of the most heroic sayings recorded of popes? The formula he signed in exile atPerea, in Thrace, was not heretical, ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGIOX. 133 but when this act was abused by the Arians, Liberius wept bitterly for the violent interpretation the document was made to bear. The clerrry of Rome appreciated the pontiff's magnanimity, they had no doubt of his faith ; they would have no other pope — Felix, the crea- ture of the emperor Constantius, they justly despised ; and, as in every similar instance, the righteous cause prevailed ; God was stronger than the emperor, truth than error. So did the synod ap- prove Damasus, and reject his rival. TerluUian was quoted about the Eucharist, and prayers for the dead ; I will show you how his testimony is in our favor. Talking of Corinth, Ephesus, and other cities, he says to the inquirer, if you want to find the established doctrine and live near Corinth, go to Corinth to find it out; if near Ephesus, to Ephesus; if near to Rome, go to Rome, and so on. This only proves that the doctrine at all these places was exactly the same ; but what is the argument 1 Does it prove that all these churches were equal in authority to Rome 1 Suppose a man in New York writes to me to know what the Catholic doctrine in any point is — I tell him he must apply to the bishop or clergy of the churches of New York for information. Does it follow from this that I question the preeminent authority of Rome ■? Does it prove any thing whatever 1 It is so far in our favor that it proves a unifurmi'ty of doclnnc — like the unity of that light which proceeds from a common fountain. Mr. C. is stricken with the authority of Peter — it haunts him like a spectre througliout this discussion — it meets him at every turn and corner of his argument, — well ! The Greek word n-Juxvi means rule, guide, govern, as well as " feed." See Homer, passim. " nii^m xaoiv" was the epithet applied usually to Agamemnon. Feed my lambs means all the flock, with the subordinate pastors spread over the universal fold. The evangelist takes care to tell us, in the parable of the temple, that ht xpake if Ihe tanpli: rf hishodn. He explained, as St. John says, more than all tiie books of the whole world could contain, to his disciples, during the forty days from his resurrection to his ascension, spent, as the scripture assures us, in speaking to them of the kingdom of God, as he every where called his church. Mr. C. says there is no priest since Christ. I grant it, in the sense that the high priest holds the place of Chri.'-t, derives iiis power from Ciirist. In this sense Christ employs the priest as his agent, and exercises by him his own priest- hood, in which (iod the Father hath (I's. 109) confiriiK d liin» by an oath forever. But in the sense that no such priest now exists, I cannot agree with the gentleman, for St. Paul says, thirty years after Christ's ascen- sion, "/t»r cvtrij liiL'h pricii lahcn front anwnir men, is ordai iif.d for men, in the thinu,)! that ajijuriiiin hi (ind, that lie may oiler up gifts and sacri- fices for sin. Who can havo compassion om them that are ignorant and on, because he himself also is compassed with infirmity, and therefore he ought, as for the people so also for himself, to oiler for sins; neither doih any man take th. eh. 5, v. 1, 2, ."?, 1. Dr-es not all this prove a priesthood distinct from the body of christians, thirty years after C'hrist, as it exists at present 1 Does not St. Paul say, we have an altar of which they cannot partake who serve thi; taber- nacle 1 Hi I), vi. 1.3, 10. And what was that altar for but for the sacri- fices which the priests were taken from among men to offer? — [Time cxpirerl.] M 134 DKBATE ON THE TUESDAY, Januauv 17tii, Half-past 9 o'clock, Jl. M. Mr. CAMFBELLriscs — I intend if possible, to sum up this argument on my second propo- sition this forenoon. I coiiUl wish that iny friend, the bishop would reply to me instead of anlicipatintr propositions in advance, and of reading or speaking of matters wliich are wholly irrelevant. He is even now occasionally on my first proposition ; anon, on the second ; and instantly, on subjects which we have not agreed to debate. He talks about my getting into thickets and circuitous labyrinths, with- out seeming to perceive that I am in pursuit of him. He makes pro- positions and assertions for me which i never uttered, and spends his time in descanting upon his own misapprehensions.* I must however, intimate to him and my audience, my purpose of ceasing to respond to any thing he may introduce not in reply to my speeclies. If I must lead the way ; he must follow. I cannot be de- coyed into all the minor and remote points he may originate. I must go on to sustain my propositions, whether he respond to them or not; and shall appropriate half an hour occasionally to such matters in his speeches as may call for my notice. I cannot, therefore debate the priesthood, or any foreign topic. But as the gentleman has again reiterated the charge, ''feed vnj sheep,"" and seems to make the whole merits of the question depend on the meaning of the word sheep ; I will once more, and I think only once more advert to it. It Ls universally admitted by Protestants and (Cath- olics, that it is the duty of pastors to feed the Jioch of their charge. If there be a common duty in the ministry of the old and new law, it is this. But it is essential to his argument to make the word icxufos sig- nifying sheep denote clergy. This is an extraordinary assumption. It would be a waste of time to argue against it. Jkit that you may see its absurdity, I will read from the Catholic version a part of the lOtli chap, of John, substituting the bishop's definition for the term. " He that cntcreth not by the door into the told of tlie c/erg-y, but cliiiib- eth ups^iiie other way, he is a thief and a robber. But he that cntereth by the door, is the pastor of'thf ckrg-ij. To this man the porter openeth, and the cler- gy hear his voice ; and he calleth his own clergy by name, and kadeth them forth. And when he halJi let forth his own clerg;/, he goeth before them, and the clergy follow him, because tliey know his voice. 1 am the door of the clergy. And how many soever have come are thieves and robbers, but the clergy heard them not. , , , . ,.^ ^ , • 11th verse. I ani the good pastor. The good pastor giveth his life for his clergy. But the hireling and lie that is not the pastor, whose own the clergy are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the clergy and fleeth; and the wolf raveneth and disperseth tlie clergy. And the hireling flccth because he is a hireling; and he hath no care of the clergy. I am the good pastor, and I know mine, and mine know me. As the Fatlit r knoweth me, and I know the Father; andl yi< Id niv life for my clergy. And uthcr clergy 1 have that are not of this fold." I s'ubmit'this without comment to the good sense of my audience. The gentleman may find it more to his account, or he is more ac- customed to speak to the prejudices of that part of the community • The other day the bishop asserted that / affirmed, the apostles wrote only to Greek cities.' This is not found in my speeches; for it is so gross an error that I could not have uttered it, even in a dream. I request the reader to examine my Bneeches for my own assertions; for he will frefjuently find the bishop in- stead of meeting his opponent, demolishing men of straw of his own creation. ROMA^ CATirOLIC KELIGIOX. 135 who rely on the authority of the Roman church without asking ques- tions, who are told not to think or reason for themselves ; but to be- lieve in the church — to them he may hold up his map triumphantly. The face of Tcrtullian or Ircnecus on paper is as good to them as ten arguments. But I speak to Protestants as well as Catholics ; and, therefore, I mast reason, for they are a reasoning population. I ex- pect them to decide bj- evidence, and not by autliority. Reference has been made to Waddington, on the papal succession. His words icere not correctly quoted by the gentleman, //zi interpre- tation is rather an evasion of the question* It is to the succession it- self he alludes. He cannot make it out : he acknowledges he can- not; nor can any living man. To resume the history of the schisms. I will read a few extracts that I have marked in a chronological table of the popes, which will exhibit a bird's eye glance of the fortunes of the Roman see, for lit- tle more than a single centurj'. 1261. Alexaiidfci' IV. cli(.s June z-\. The lioly sec vacant 3 months and 3 days. Tlie cardinals who proceeded to the ehction, not being able to pitch on one among thenisehe^, chose I'inncis, patriarch of Jerusalem, who takes upon him the name of Urban IV. and is consecrated Sept. 4. 1265. After a vacancy of four months, cardinal Guy, the Gross, born in Provence, is elected pope, Feb. 5, and consecrated March 18, under the name of Cle- ment I\'. 1268. Clement IV. dies Oct. 29. The holy see lies vacant for two years, nine months, and two dajs. 1271. The cardinals after a long debate on Sept. l,by waj- of compromisal elected Thibald, arch deacon of Liege, native of I'laccnzia, who was then at I'tolemais. 1276. Gregory X. dies Jan. 10. Peter of Tarentaise, cardinal bishop of Oslia, is elected the 21st. under the name of Iimocent V. After his death, wliich happened June the 2d. cardinal Ottobon, a Cienocse, is elected in his place, July the 12th, and takes upon him the name of Adrian V. He dies at Viter- bo, Aug. 10. without having been consecrated. Twenty-five days after, cardinal John Peter, the son of Julian, a Portuguese, is elected and consecra- ted. Sept, 1.5, under the name of John XXI. 1277. John XXI. is crushed by the fall of the ceiling of the palace of Viterbo, and dies May the 20tli. iVov. 25, John Cojestaii is elected, and takes the name of Nicholas III. and consecrated Dec. 26. 12)10. jNicliolaixlies Aug. 22. The holy see is vacant six months. 1267. lionorius IV. dies on April !i. 'I he holy see vacant till April of tJie next year. 1292. IN'icholas die* on April 4. The holy gee vacant two years three months and two days. 1304. The death of Benedict July 0. The holy see remained vacant till the next year. 1305. Clement V. is chosen pope June .'>. He is crowned at Lyons IVov. 11, and resides in France. 1328. Lewis of Havaria causes Michael (.'orbario to be chosen anti-pope, who fiiken the nanir: of .Nicholas V. and is enthroned May 12. He was driven out of fltimc, Aug. 4. 1378. Gregory XL died March 27tli. The cardinals entered the conclave at Rome, April 7th. The Koman) refpiired a Koman or an Italian pojie. The arrh-binhopof Paris is chosen in a tumultuous iiimiiikt, April 9lh,iiiid crowned the I7lh. under the name of Urban VI. The cardinals (1^- into Aiiagnia in Mov, and prtjtmt against the « lection of Urban. They came to Kondi August the 27tli, enter the conclave, and chose, .September 20lli, the cardi- nal of fienrvn, who took the name of {'lenient Vll. wliirli caused a schisnt in the church. 1379. Clement VTIF. flics to Naples, nud from thence goes to Avignon, where he arrived .'une 10. 'I'he conipetitom for thi' papacy condemn one another. Dn Pin. — }'ol. II. 136 DEBATE ON THE Touchinrr all that the gentleman has said or may say of the authen- ticity of Du Pin, I observe that the reporters have recorded my de- fence of his reutpation. They will also have stated the fact that I only quote him as authentic on such matters as all other historians tes- tify. I will not then repeat the same defence again and again. I know, indeed, that what is authentic with .lansenists may be he- terodox with Jesuits, and vice versa. When the Romanists are hard pressed, they have no English authentic historians. And when we quote a Latin one, we are sure to err in the translation. Bellar- mine is repudiated by one party ; even Barronius is sometimes disal- lowed. Still being in Latin, he is more authentic than any other. We shall therefore take from him a few words in confirmation of what we read from the Decretals of Du Pin. Barronius, vol. vi. p. 5G2, A. D. 498, tells us that the emperor's faction sustained the election of Lauren- tius to the papacy. Li this struggle " murders, robberies and numberless evils, were perpetrated at Rome," Nay such were the horrible scenes that, says Barronius, " there was a risk of their destroying the whole city." In the schism between popes Sylverius and Vigilius in the sixth century, the latter, though an atrociously wicked man, " impli- cated," says Barronius, " in so many crimes" that all virtuous men opposed him, was raised to the papal chair. Yet this man was pro- nounced a good pope. Barronius says he is not to be despised though a bad man. Let every man recollect, "says he, that even to the sha- dow of Peter, immense virtue was given of God!" (Bar. vol. vii. p. 420.) 'In the midst of contentions which rent the Roman Catholic church, pope Pelagiu3 I. was chosen. This pope approved the council which pope Vigilius had condemned. This increased the flames of eccle- siastical war to such a degree tliat the pope could not find a bishop of Rome, who could consecrate him ; and he was constrained to beg a priest of Ostium to do this service; "a thing," says Barronius, "which never had occurred before." (Vol. vii. p. 475.) The popes Formosus and Stephen lived in the ninth century. The latter, says Barronius, was so wicked, that he would not have dared to enroll him in the list of popes, were it not that antiquity gives his name. In the exercise of papal infallibility, he not only rescinded the ac/s and decrees of his infallible predecessor Formosus; but collec- ting a council of cardinals and bishops as bad as himself, he actually had the old pope taken out of his grave; and he brought him into court, tried, and condemned him ; cut oft' three of his fingers ; and plunged his remains into the Tiber. See Platina's' life of Stephen Vl. and Barronius do.' 'Barronius under the j'ear 1004, names three rival popes, who per- petrated the most shameful crimes, and bartered the papacy, and sold It for gold. He, though a Roman Catholic writer, calls them Cerber- us, the three headed beast which had issued from the gates of hell !' Hear his words in his life of pope Stephen VII. A. D. 900. ' The case is such, that scarcely any one can believe it, unless he sees it with his eyes, and handles it with his hands, viz. what unworthy, vile, unsightly, yea, execrable and hateful things the sacred apostolic see, on whose hinges the universal apostolical church turns, has been compelled to see, &c.' ' Genbrard in his chronicles, under the year 904 says, " for nearly ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 137 150 years, about fifty popes deserted wholly the virtue of their predeces- sors, being apostate rather than apostolical !' 'And to crown the climax, Barronius, under the year 912 adds : '• What is then the face of the holy Roman church ! How exceed- ingly foul it is ! When most potent, sordid and abandoned women, (Meretices,) ruled at Rome: at whose will the sees were changed; bishops were presented ; and what is horrid to hear, and unutterable, P'alse Pontiffs, the paramours of these women, were intruded into the chair of St. Peter, &c." He adds, — " For who can affirm that men illegally intruded by bad women, (scortis) were Roman pontiffs !" Again : " The canons were closed in silence ; the decrees of pontiff's were suppressed : the ancient traditions were proscribed ; and the sa- cred ceremonies and usages of former days were wholly extinct. See his Annals A, D. 912.'* Again : he relates that pope Alexander was elected by cardinals, some of whom were bribed, some allured by promises of promotion, and some enticed by fellowship in his vices and impurities to give him their suffrages. He refers to various authors who complained that he was famous for his debauchery ; he tells us of his vile exam- ple in keeping a Roman strumpet Vanozia, by whom he had many children; that he conferred wealth and honors on them, and even cre- ated one of them, Ca'sar Borgia (an inordinately wicked man) arch- bishop of the church. Vid. Bar. Annals, vol. xix. p. 413 et seq. 'The same writer (vol. ix. p. 145) records the election of Bene- dict IX. at the age of twelve years, which he says was accom- plished by gold, and he calls it (" horrendum ac detestabile visu") " horrible and detestable to behold ;" and yet he adds that the whole christian world acknowledged Benedict, without controversy, to be a true pope '. Stephen vii. The unparalleled wickedness of this pope is conveyed in a sin- gle line : [//a quidem passiis f.icinorus homo quique utyur et latro ingressus est in ovilc avium, laqueo vitam acleo ivfami exilti vindicc Deo clausit.'] " Thus per- ished this \jllanous man, who entficd tlie sheepfuld as a tliief and a robber; and who in the retribution of God, ended liis days by the infamous death of the hal- ter." (Bar. vol. X. p. 742.) Again, Barronius says of the 10th century : " VVhat then was the face of t!if Roruaii chiiri'h .' How very filthy, when th« most powerful Jind iit)rdid iiarlots then ruled at Rome, at whose pleasure sees were chanecd and bishoprics were given, and — which is horrible to hear, and most abominable — tln;ir gnllants wcri- olitruded into the see of Peter, and made Jiilse popes ; for who can say they could be lawful popes, who were intruded by such harlots without law ? There was no mention of the election or consent of clergy; the canons were silent, the decrees of popes suppressed, the ancient traditions proscribed, — lust armed with tlie secular power, challenged all things to itself What kind of Cardinals, do you imagine must then be chosen by those men- «ters, when nothing is so natural as for like to beget like ? who can doubt, but they in all things did consent to those tli:it chose them ? Who will not easily believe that they animaterl them and followed their footsteps 7 Who unfierstands not, that such men must wish that our Lord would have slept continually, and never have awoke to judgment to take cognizance of, and punish their inioiiities." Ann. Vol. X. 912. Now if the grntlrman objects to any of lliesc quotatinn.s which 1 have hastily, but I believe most correctly made: the originals are * Brownlec'g Letters on Rom. Cath. controversy, pp. 36, 37,38. m2 18 133 DJb'UATK 0.\ THE here and let them be examined : For, these beintr admitted it is use- less to object to Du Pill, who never uses so severe lan.n[uage against the popes as Raronius and Genebrand, Platina and others. Finally on this subject. I'^or seventy years, there was no pope in Rome, besides all the oilier interregnums. The pope resided at Avig- non in France and left .St. Peter's chair empty. For almost half a centur}' there were two popes, and two lines of popes existing at one time — one reigning in Italy, and one in France. And at last there were three popes — Benedict XIII. the Spanish pope, Gregory XII. the French pope, and John XXIII. the Italian pope. Then the council of Constance met — A. D. 1 HI, and made a fourth, or true pope, and depos- ed the three anti-popes. Such was the 99th schism in the papacy ! Is there, — may I not ask with all these facts before us, — Is there any man on earth that can have the least confidence in any pope as the successor of Peter? A thousand questions the most learned and in- tricate, which no living bishop has time or means to examine, must be decided before he could rationally or religiously believe that the succession from Peter has any existence at all : or, in truth, it cannot be believed but upon mere authority ! We now proceed to show that there has been no fixed and uniform method of electing the popes. Indeed history and tradition furnish us with no less than seven difl'erent methods. 1. Irenffius says, ' that tradition said, that Peter appointed his suc- cessor.' And if he did, why do not all the popes follow his exam- ple 1 for Irenasus is as good authority for this, as for that concerning the founding of the church of Rome. 2. The priests and people are said to have often elected the first popes ; or, rather the bishops nominated and the people elected. — I ought to have observed distinctly, that there is as much sophistry in the word pope as ever was played ofl" on earth. The word pope, in the east was first applied to all bishops, and is so used in Russia to this day. It was in the 5th century applied to the senior bishops and metropolitans of the west. But it was not until the time of Gregory VII. that it was exclusively appropriated by his own innovation, to the bishops of Rome. Hence, in this variety of acceptation, popes many were always in the church, and were elected b)' the people. But the persons first called popes and those now wearing the title, have no other resem- blance than the common name. 3. The emperors nominated and bishops elected, and the emperors appointed on their own responsibility. 4. Leo VIII. transferred the whole power of choosing the pope to the emperor, being tired with the inconstancy of the Romans. 5. Barronius in his Annals, 112, 8, and sect. 141, 1, says, 'They (the popes) were introduced by powerful men and women. // was frequently the price of prostitution !^ G. By the decree of pope Nicholas II. in his La^teran Synod : 'The whole business was given over to the cardinals, an order of men, not heard of for 1000 years after Christ. The popes now make the cardinals, and the cardinals make the pope. What a glorious repub- lic ! My friend, a staunch republican, agrees that a few men in Rome should elect a head for the universal church ! But sometimes — 7. General councils (as that of Constance, Pisa and Basil) took upon themselves the making of popes, and, as we have seen, made a ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 139 fourth pope, when there were already three acknowledged by different parts of the church. Can these facts be denied ? They canmot mid I presume, will not. It is now affirmed that the intrigues of papal elections incompara- bly surpass the intrigues of any court oh earth. The politics of France, of Italy, of Austria, are so incorporated with the schemes of the cardinals, or so bias or bribe them, that on the election of a pope, it is usually said, " Austria has succeeded" or " Spain," or " France has prevailed this time !" In one word, the papal chair is the most corrupt and corrupting institution, that ever stood on earth. The Ro- man Cesars, or the Egyptian dynasties, were pure and incorrupt, com- pared with this mammoth scheme of iniquit)-. On the whole premi- ses, I ask, would the head of the church so jeopardize all the interests of his kingdom as to make the popes of Rome, or faith in them es- sential elements of his system of redemption, or necessary to the sal- vation of any human being] ! — To recapitulate. — This being a fundamental and primary essential element of the Roman church, I have labored it more than any other ; and yet I have not said a tithe of what may be said, or even what I have to say on the subject. But I have aimed at establishing four points in demonstrating this proposition. And to adopt the positive and dogmatic style of my learned opponent, may I not say that / have fully proved- — 1. That the office of pope, or supreme head on earth, has no scrip- ture warrant or authority whatever. Indeed, that the whole beau ideal of a church of nations, with a monarchical head, (which, in the es- timation of the liishop, is equivalent to the word church of Christ,) is as gratuitous an assumption as ever graced a romance, ancient or modern.— 2. That it cannot be ascertained that Peter was ever bishop of Rome — nay, indeed, it has been shown, that it is wholly contrary to the New Testament history, and incompatible with his office. — 3. That Christ gave no law of succession. — 4. That if he had, that succession has been destroyed by a long continuance of tlie jjreatest monsters of crime that ever lived ; and by cabals, intrigues, violence, envy, lust, and schisms, so that no man can believe that one dro|) of apostolic grace is cither in the person or office of Cregory XVI. the present nominal incumbent of Peter's chair! It would be now as easy to prove that Solomon's mosque built by the Turks, is Solomon's tf inplf, in which .lesus Christ stood; as that the popes or church oi Honir' is a christian institution. On what, now, rests Koman ( -atiioijcism ? ! If the foundation be destroyed, how can the building stand 1 I need not tell my opponent that this is a blow at the root of his apostolic tree. He feels it, and I am (jlad to think that if any American bishop can sustain these pre- tensions, my learned opponent is that man. He has asked, and ho rnay again ask, where was the Protestant cliurch before Luther's time? In reply, I ;isk, where was the pope before; Constantino's time? He brought Mosheim to offset Waddington and Jones on the subject of the Novatians. And what did Mosheim prove contrary lo theao historians ? Yon have lieard with what success my o|)ponent seeks lo tarnish the reputation of Novatians, Waldenses and I'rotestajits. As a general offs(;t to all his declamation on this subject, I will give you the testimony of a t;ood Roman Catholic : for he was an iTujuLiilor — I mean Ricneriua Saccho, one of tlie most inveterate enemies of 1-10 DEBATE ON THE these old fashioned Protestants. I have the original before me, but shall not read it unless it be required : The translation reads : "Aiiion;^ all t!ic sects" (th(Me wire sects, you peictivc, before the Reforma- tion) " which still are, orhave bci n, there is not one more pernicious ty the church than that of the Leonites;" (a name by whicii the VVaklenscs were sometimes called,) "anil that for three reasons. The 1st is, because it is the oldest, for some say it hath existed from the time of pope Sylvester; olhcrsj'iom the lime of the Apostles. The 2nd, because it is more general, for there is scarce any connfry tohere this sect is not. The 3rd, because wlien all others sects beget horror by their blasjjliemies against (i!)d,this of the Leoiii*< s hath a great slio'u of piety because thev Wvc justly bijbremcji, and believe all thins^s rightly con- cerning God and all the articles contained in the creed. Only they blas- phemed the church of Rome." Rein. .S'nn/iO. edit. Gritzcr, O. S. J. cap. 4. page 54 I could-.give much more Roman Catholic testimony in proof that the doctrines of Protestantism continued from the days of the first Roman schism till now : but this at present would seem superfluous. Nor will I speak now of tlie old English and Irish churches which the Roman bishops sought in vain for many centuries to bring into their fold. There is nothing betrays a less discriminating regard to the facts of ecclesiastical history, than to ask where was the church be- fore the days of Luther 1 — But I hasten to the point yet before me, which, like some others, I may not remember, was reserved for a more convenient season. It was an objection drawn in part from Eph. iv. 11, and from the alleged difficulty of obtaining a ministry but through the popes of Rome. This passage, viewed in common with Matth. xxviii. 18, 19, seems to me, rather to remove all difficulty on the sui)ject. Matth. xxviii. gives all authority to the apostles to set up the christian church, and pro- mises them miraculous aid, till the work was done. " I am with you continually till the conclusion of thi.^ stale — sac t>ic a-uvnAtsa! t'.v aiwvsf. Of which I must here speak more particularly. At present it suffices to repeat the fact of such a commission, and such a promise to the apostles. Now let us hear Paul. When Christ ascended, "he s;ave gifts to men." — What, let me ask, were they ] " He gave apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers" — all miraculously endowed. They were not raised up, out of the church ; but given directly from heaven to the church, or for building a cliurcb ! What, again, let me ask Paul, were they given for] "For the perfecting of the saints:" or, according to the Douay bible, " for the consummation of the saints unto the work of the ministry, unto the edifying of the body of Christ." And for how long, let me ask, still more empnatically ] " Until" (it is Mi/_gi in Greek, donee in Latin, adverbs expressive of the time how long) " Until we all come into the unity of the faith and knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man''' (not men — that is, to a perfect body) " into the measure of the age of the fulness of Christ." — The Roman church being judge, then, these officers were given to the church after the ascension, for a special work, and for a limited time. — Till, out of Jews and Gentiles, they had made one pehfect man, or church. Now, these apostles acted in exact accordance with the nature of the case. They preached, baptized, and congregated disciples, in particular places. These disciples had, from the nature of the case, to receive from them the whole christian institution. They knew neither what to believe or do, but as they were taught by these in- spired men. — Hence, the apostles preached, baptized, taught, served RO:aAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 141 tables, and dispensed all ordinances, and performed all oiRces among them, till the body of the church had learned its dut}-. Then they taught them to select from among them'selves certain officers — gave them the qualifications, and showed them in their own persons how they were to be set apart and ordained to these offices. — For example, the deacons, or public servants of the church of Jerusalem, the 7nother church. Again, they taught them to send out missionaries or evan- gelists, as in the church of Antioch ; and finally, to ordain elders or bishops over the flock, as soon as they had persons qualified for that office, — They taught the church, then, to have bishops and deacons, and evangelists (or general missionaries, as the case may be). They gave the law, the qualifications, and the mode of inducting them into office. They never taught any one church to depend always upon Jerusalem, or Antioch, or Rome, or Corinth; but they taught the ne- cessity of all these offices — gave the qualifications of the officers, and assisted in ordaining them in many particular congregations, of which congregations with the same laws, authority, and order, there never have been wanting thousands from that day till now. Order has its foundation in nature. The highest officers were call- ed seniors or ciders ; because of their age ; and bishops or overseers, because of their office. Deacons, not having so much authority and glory, and not having a salary, like bishops, there never has been among them any controversy about succession ! But had there been any great honor or reward iii that office, we should doubtless have had as much ado about an unbroken line ; and could as easily find one in this case as in that of the bishops of Rome, or Constantinople. The same order obtained in the christian cliurch — I mean, substantially, that obtained in the synagogues of the Jews. The same word WfWoi/TWiv or presbytery, is found in the New Testament in reference to both the synagogue and the church. " Stir up the gift," office " that is in thee, by the laying on of the hands of the presbytery." Indeed, the synagogue, mucli more than the tabernacle or temple, was the archetype of the order, which the apostles set up. In every case the question was put to tlic people, " Look out, choose out, select from among yourselves," &.c. My friend is almost a Protestant on some points. He occasionally recommends the bible to his flock, and he says that tlie ordinances of religion do not receive tlieir virtue from an uiilu>!y or holy pope — that he has his authority to administer from Ciirist rather than from the pope. Indeed, I know not why the spirit of God should be promised through such a wretched and polluted channel as the po])es of liome, rather than to operate from hr>aveii in all its holy influences upon those, who by its appointment, are chosen and ordained by prayer, fasting, and imposition of hands, as deacons or bishops of the christian con- gregations. We lose nothing then, in abandoning the leaky and sinking ship of pontifical authority in the Roman ("albolic church. — [Time expired.] Ilft/f-past. 10 o'clock, Jl. M. liisiiop Pi;ucEi.i. riic» — IMy friend has sot me the example of recajiilulating. I shall not fail to do so in due time. He has talked around one of the invincible texts of Scripture which i had adduced for Peter's headahip : " Simon, 142 DEBATE ON THE Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, (the plural) that he may sift you as wheat :. but I have prayed for thee, that thv faith fail not; and thou, Ijciiijr converted, confirm thy brethren." St. Luke xxii. 32. And he gratuitously asserts that " Confirm" here means only " Comfort." But will any man say that such an interpretation has weakened the force of my arf (Jod, by thi; ovrrtbrow of idolatry, and to sanctify a chosen people for everla-sting life, by the purest virtues of religion, we are not to wonder that Satan, the jealous enemy of human luip|)ines8, should exert his utmost powers to obstruct the be- nevohMit design. In fulfilment of the Savior's prediction, and from the very nature; of man, it was necessary that persecutions, heresies, schisms and domestic scandals should happen; but .lesus (^lirisl had likewise foretold that they should not prevail. The Pagan tyrants of the earth may rage; the courage and jiatience of our martyrs will tri- umph and multiply. I[('resi{!s may start u|) in various forms, and for a while seduce thousands into errr)r ; they will, at bnglli, sink back again into the dark abyss from which thry first emerged. Gui- ded by the spirit of truth, and confirmed into the unity of her belief, the church will ever successfully oppose to their impotent attempts, N 19 MO DKnATi: o> rni: the promises of her divine Founder, the antiquity of her faith, the con- sent of nations, the order of hor hierarchy, the holy severity of her discipline, the hrirrht example of thousands of her faillifiil children, the sacred history of her doctrines, and the decisions of her councils. Schisms may at times perplex and divide the faithful, but the church by her authority will either close the breach, or separate the refracto- ry members from her communion. The vicious lives of some of her children may contradict and disgrace their christian profession, they may violate her laws, they may insult her authority, and invade her sacred rights ; they never will he able to overturn her ministry, to shake her hierarchy or to alter her doctrine. She will never cease to warn sinners of their duty, to correct, to instruct, to direct mankind in the way of salvation. By her persevering zeal for God's honor, by the force of her ex- hortations, by the solemnity of her public service, by the morality of her precepts, and by her practice of the evangelical counsels, she will continue to prepare souls for heaven, while she exhibits to the world a rich assemblage of the most heroic virtues. It is thus, that our his- tory attests the care which God has taken of his church. The whole number of popes has been nearly two hundred and sixty Of these, the first forty were saints, or martyrs, a small number only, not more than twenty, can be called bad men ; the rest were remarkable for eminent virtue, charity, zeal, learning and patronage of letters. Peter was twenty-five years bishop of Rome ; and non videhis annos Petri, you w'ill not be pope as long as Peter — is a proverb which every new pope hears. Pius VI. and Pius VII, came nearest to the years of Peter, but they did not attain them. But says the gentle- man, the pope transferred his sec for some time from Rome, to Avignon. I grant it; but have I not said, were he a wanderer in A- byssinia, he would still retain his title and authority. We were told of a council which cashiered three popes, and made a fourth ! My friends, what sophistry is this? Does my friend think he is addressing people but one remove from barbarism, instead of the enlightened and liberal citizens of the queen of the west? I wish him to understand that we, at least, are equal to the people of Bethany in intelligence. Among these citizens, I thank God, my lot is cast. Does Mr. C. — suppose thai they cannot answer his sophistry by the true statement of the fact 1 The council cashiered three doubtful popes, or rather no popes at all, and elected one true pope. What has become of his logic T Stephen VI. had thebody of Formosus dug up and cut off his fingers. My friend has taken this from Pope and McGuire's discussion, and has seen the answer there. In this unpardonable act of Stephen, we at least discern zeal for the rules of discipline, which forbade the trans- ferring of a bishop from one see to another. For this offence the need- less act of severity was done. It shews the popes expose what they think wrong in popes ; just as my friend would know nothing of their misdeeds, if Catholic historians had not had sincerity, piety and zeal to denounce them. Genebrard said that the popes were more often apostates than apostles. I am sure that, in this case, truth was sac- rificed to wit, and faithful testimony to virtue as well as faithful ex- position of vice, for the gingle between the words apostates and apostles. But Genebrard says not, absolutely, they were apos- BOMAN CATHOLIC BELIGION. 147 tates, but that they had fallen short of the virtues of their predeces- sors. My friend quarrels with the name, cardinals. The name is Latin and as old as that language. But I will not contend for the name. He says the cardinals, were not so called for 1000 years, but did not show his authority. This was, however, the title given to priests charged with the care of large churches, as far back as the year 150, or at least in 300. But call them what you may, they were a portion, and an eminent portion, of the Roman clergy in all ages. Now, as for- inerly, there are cardinal priests, cardinal deacons, and even cardinal laymen. They are a superior order of men, the patrons of the arts and sciences, as well as the ornaments and supports of the church, and the benefactors of the poor. They liberally entertain and treat our travelling fellow-citizens with great civility — for instance, Mr. Dewey, an Unitarian minister, lately in Rome, and cardinal Weld, a dis- tinguished English nobleman, in whose father's castle, at Lulworth, if I am not mistaken, our fiist archbishop, the cousin of Charles Car- roll of CarroUton, was consecrated bishop. — Read Mr. Dewey's ele- gant and thrilling pages. They will almost make you a Catholic. Certainly they will liberalize your minds already raised far above vul- gar prejudices. The c^.rdinals elect the pope — but if the pope creates the cardinals, surely he does not create his own electors ! Mr. C. — has not told us yet, from what true and holy apostolic, church, the Roman church apostatized. He has told you of the Albi- genses, Vaudois, Novatians, Donatists, &c., but they furnish no con- tinuous church. They are, I say again, ignoble ancestry. My friends, read history for yourselves if you wish to sec what a miserable set of wretches these sectarians were. My friend says, that Peter was married — but I defy him to prove that he retained his wife after he became a bishop. I will meet Mr. Campbell on this doctrine of the celibacy of the clergy, and shew him in the words of St. Paul, 1st Cor. i. 20, and in those of Jesus Christ, Matthew xix. 1-2, whose expressions, although he was purity itself, I dare not repcsat in .Mr. C — 'a fastidious cars, " that there are not many wise uccordinf^ to thejhsh.''^ St. Paul, who was a bachelor, says, 1st Cor. vii. " I would that all were as myself. I say to the unmarried and the widows ; it is good for them if they so continue even as 1. v. 8. He that is without a wife is solicitous for the tilings that belong to the Lord, how he may please Cod. But he that is with a wife, is solicitous for the tilings of the v.orld, how lie may please his wife : and he is divided. And the unmarried woman and the vir- in thinketh on the tilings of the Lord, that siie may be holy both iti ody and spirit. But she that is married thinketh on the things of tlio world, how she may please her husband." Read the entire clinptpr Marriage was ordaini-d by Almighty (iod for tlie propagation of the human race. The (Jathoiic church not only a)>proves the institution, but teaches that f'hrist hath exalted it to the dignity of a sarraiufiit. St. Paul, while he wishes all to be like himself, unmarried, still acknow- ledges that all are not called to that state; and they who cannot prac- tise continence, l>e wishes to marry; so does the Catholic church. Her ministers are not allowed to lake a vow of chastity until they have at- tained an age when they can, aided by divine grace, d(>cide on their capability for its pure obuervauce. And now, young iadisu and geu- 148 DEBATE ON THE tlemen, take care you nevpr become wliat Mr. C. would make you, the successors of Paulicians. They condemned all connubial ties, eaying that marriage came from the evil principle. But, married or single, let us not forget that our days in this life are numbered ; the gayest are frequently death's earliest victims. "For the fashion of this world, says the apostle, passeth away." Let priests then do good, even as Catholic religious have done, to the whole human family, renounc- ing the ties that would bind them to a few only, that ihey may be like God, the fathers and benefactors of many. Mr. C. spoke of ministering to the sick. I thank him for the hint. lu deeds of charity, the Catholic priesthood, the Catholic religious of all orders, are unsurpassed. Their ' labor of love' is seen in the hospital, the pest-house, the dungeon, the orphan asylum ; where the cholera makes its dreadful ravages, where the pestilence stalketh at noonday, or midnight! Hear Waddington — " The Ursulines. Of tlxt more inodern orders, there is also oncwhich may seem to require our notice — tliat of the I'rsuliries. Its origin is ascribed to Angela di Brescia, about tlie year 1537, tliough the saint from whom it received its name, Ursula Benincasa, a native of Naples, was born ten years afterwards. Its character was peculiar, and recalls our attention to the primitive form of ascetic is and I)ii Pin. though not good (Catholics, '• were authentic hisltirians." But that adinission gives them no new weight, or indeed, no weight at all with me. I have already given my reasons for the authority of Dn Pin. I'ut where, may I ask, is bis authority f'>r Sylvester's calling the council of iNice! The emperor did it at the general suggestion 152 DEBATE ON THE of iho eastern bishops. And if Osiiis presided, we have no reason to think that he did it as tlie pope's legate. For this we have an- cient authority. The gentleman spoke in warm admiration of Osi- us : but did he not apostatize, or some way lose his orthodoxy ]] He was, indeed, a learned and talented man — a sort of standing presi- dent in the early councils ; and in that age of the world as among ec- clesiastics there were few men of general learning, we therefore find him conspicuous in all assemblies; and his name stands first in the subscriptions of the decrees and creeds of the early part of the 4th century, but that he presided as the pope's legate in any council, espe- cially that of Nice, is insusceptible of proof. We shall however hear antiquity on the subject. "Constantino seeing that he had labored in vain to allay the disputes which divided the church, thought it would be tlie most ready and ctl'ectual means to restore peace, to call a numerous synod composed of eastern and western bishops. This council was called cccuminical, i. e. a council of the whole world, or tne whole earth, because it was called together from all parts of the Roman empire, to which the title of the world, or earth, was given, 'and which did almost in- clude the Catholic church. This council was assembled by order of the em- peror at Nice, a city of Bithynia, about the month of July, in the year 325, in the second year of Constantine's reign. St. Sylvester was then bishop of Rome, who sent thither V'ictor and Vincentius, his legates. It is commonly held that this council consisted of 318 bishops; but those who were present at it do not preciselj' determine this number, but say only that there were about 300 bishops. 'Tis not certainly known who presided in this council, but it is very probable that it was Hosius who held the chief place there in his own name, because he had already taken cognizance of this affair, and was much esteemed by the em- peror, who was then present. Athanasius, in his second apology, calls Hosius the father and president of all the councils. The name of this bishop is the IJrst in all the subscriptions. Alex- ander was much esteemed, as appears by the letter of the council. Eustathius, of Antioch, was called the chief bishop of the council by Proclus and by Facun- dus; but it is more probable that Hosius presided there in his own name, and not in the pope's, for he no where assumes the title of legate of the holy see; and none of the ancients say that he presided in this council in the pope's name. GelasiusCizicenus, who first affirmed it, says it without any jiroof or authority." Du Pin, vol. \,]>p. 598, 599. Now where is the gentleman's authority for the nature of the bish- op of Rome or his legates, either calling or presiding in this council ! Upon such disregard of ancient history rest many such assertions now in common circulation and in common belief. But as I said before on this point, I should not have dwelt a moment upon it, had not my opponent affected peculiar accuracy in his details. The bishop admits Barronius to be an authentic historian. Now, neither Barronius nor Du Pin even admitted so much in reference to the demerits of the popes, as bishop Purcell has admitted in the pre- sence of this great congregation : For he says " I have no doubt but these bad popes are now expiating their crimes in the pen- al fires of hell." While these words were sounding in my ears, the question simultaneously arose, with the sensation produced. What ! Has the Lord Jesus his vicars — his representatives on earth, now roasting in the flames of hell ? I put it to intelligent men, whether such an idea is not repugnant to every principle of the christian re- ligion ? When Simon proposed to purchase the gift of the Holy Spirit, what did Peter say to him ? " Thy money perish with thee !" Does this look like winking at such enormities? Were not the apostles all persons of unblemished reputation ] and if such holy men, the R03IAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 153 Models of erery virtue, were first appointed by the Lord to conduct the affairs of his kingdom, how comes it to pass that he has changed his administration and trusted it to such a succession of pretended representatives'? Has Christ changed his purpose with respect to his church, that he will allow its supreme head on earth to act every species of crime, and yet be his acceptable vicegerents! INlay I not say, that the darkest hour of midnight is not more opposed to the light of noon, than is the general character of the popes of Rome to that of the apostles ! The gentleman exclaims, " How precise these Catholics always in their dates !" There is however, an over precision, that creates suspicion. When a man begins to swear very circumstantially before his word is called in question, I begin to suspect his evidence : and when I see authors testifying that Peter reigned twenty four years five months and ten days, bishop of Rome (as I have it on some ta- bles of the popes ;) I tliink he ought also to come down to hours, minutes and seconds ! and then we would know how to appreciate him. This resembles Peter's putting away his wife after he became bishop of Rome. " What accuracy !" Let the gentleman prove first that he was bishop of Rome, and then we shall show that he still retained his wife. The gentkman'9 compliments to the citizens of Cincinnati, however well deserved on their part, will not so blind the eyes of this audience as not to understand the argument ; and the design of their panegyrist. Nor will his gratuitous denunciation of the Albigenses, Donatists, Novatians, Paulicians, and others, pass for historic truth. They were such " vile heretics" in the estimation of *' holy mother," as are we " schismatical Protestants." Their reputation we have fully sustain- ed from unexceptionable authority. The gentleman will have Uu Pin in every speech. Can he prove, or has lie proved liiiii unfaithful in stating a single historic fact? Not one. Nor can he disprove those Roman Catholic vouchers for him on whose testimony I rely. But as the reiteration of assertion is no proof, and as I am not ob- liged to repeat arguments as often as he makes assertions, I shall notice one or two new mailers to which he would give emphasis. But it ie time to examine the philosophy of the plea for wicked popes. The Messiah descended through a long line of ancestors, some of whom were wicked men. That is, the human nature of the Messiah descended through some wicked progenitors. Indeed ! To the honor of Jesus f^hrisl, bo it said, he liunililcd himself for our exaltation: he condescended to be made of a woman, to be descended from Adam, Noah, and others. In such a long line, he must necessarily, have had all the varieties of luimaD nature in his ancestors. He chose to make himself of uo reputation — to he born in a stable, of the hum- blest and poorcHt |)arcntagi'. Hut who would argiu! from ihcnre, that because his flesh and blood were so descended ; therefore, the Holy Spirit muat descend to the church, in all its official gifts of authority and governmental influ' CATICOLIC RELIGIOX. 167 podes than the two Indies. Two men of different sects will meet : says one, "Do 5-ou believe in Christ V " Yes." " But you do not be- lieve in him as God ?" '-No." "No matter, v>e are both good believers." A^ain, two others — " Do you believe in Christ?" " Yes V " But you not believe in a hell V " No." " No matter, we are both sound ortho- dox christians." Or again," Do you believe in Christ]" "Yes." "But you don't believe in baptism" — and so if goes. Now Jesus Christ cannot contradict himself: he cannot say things incompatible with eacli other, as that two and two make four ; and two and two make five. My friends, I come here not to attack other sects. I come onl)- to defend the truth. Of all religions, all teach- ing, as they do, contrary doctrines, one only can be right. If one only can be true, all others must be untrue. Have you ascertained which is that true one 1 And if so, how have you ascertained it? To whatever denomination you may belong, your Protestant neighbor, as enlightened, as conscientious and as pious in his own opinion as you are, thinks you have embraced dangerous error, and Jesus Christ sounds in your ears the dreadful words, *' He that believeth not" — not what he thinks is right, but what is right — " shall be damned.''^ Mark xvi. 16. — [Time expired.] Pour o'clock, P, M. Mr. Campbell risei — \ hope we shall better understand e^ch other. The question be- tween Protestants and Roman Catholics, on the subject of infallibility as respects the faith, is usually propounded in the following form: * li there an infallible rule an infal- lible one. 'I he fallibility, or the infallibility is in the ajiplication of the rule — not in the ruir itself. The merhanirian may have a perfect rule; anri yet err in measuring any superficies. Ft is not possible in mechanics, nor in morals, nor in religion, to have a rule which will prevent error : so long as those who use it are free and fallible agents. As Paul said on an occasion, not cxnctly similar, we may here say : 168 DEBATE ON THE ' If there could have been a law given to free agents, which would havo*precUuled error, verily God would have given it. But as he has not given any such law, therefore, there has been error in heaven as on earth. Angels fell and Adam apostatized. I own, it may be said, that in common parlance, we figuratively talk of an infallible rule. I admit that we do, and that is the reason, when we come to debate the mattc^r, the parties are confounded : for the bible alone, or the bible on the table ; and the church alone, or the church and the bible together, have made no one free from error. Therefore, there is no infallible rule in truth : but we have a perfect rule, and if we apply it perfectly, it will make us perfect. So far, then, as infallibi- lity is concerned, if there be truth in these remarks, both parties are again equal. Our rule is the bible alone. The Roman Catholic rule contains one hundred and thirty five large folio volumes superadded To the bible, and the apocrypha ! These are composed of the following parts and parcels: 1st Apostolical Fathers 35 folios, 2nd Eight volumes of Decretals, 3rd Ten volumes of Bulls of the Popes; 4th Thirty one volumes of Canons and Decrees of Councils; 6th Fifty one folios of the Acta Sanctorum — Acts of the Saints, amount- ing in ail to, — one hundred and thirty five volumes folio. Our rules, then, differ exceedingly in point of length, breadth and thickness. The Roman Catholic rule is exceedingly unwieldy. It requires a whole council to move it, and apply it to a single opinion. Ours is, at least, portable. — But still the phrase rule of faith is not Protestant. The bible is the faith ; and that testimony is the rule and measure of our belief: for in logical truth testimony is the only proper rule of faith. However, the question is not strictly, what is the rule of faith ? We both agree that the true reason of infallibility is inspiration. I was glad to hear this noble concession from my learned opponent. Jesus Christ was able to give a perfect rule. He therefore inspired twelve apostles to form that rule, and enjoined us to hear them. So far, there is no difference between ils. We both have a perfect rule, and that perfect rule is the bible ; and the reason of its perfection is its inspiration. But where is the inspiration of the one hundred and thirty five folios ? Does it require this immense library to make us understand the bible ? However, if my friend can establish their in- spiration, and show that .Tcsus Christ has spoken in these volumes; we will adopt them without controversy. But there is a want of uni- formity in the Catholic faith (even with the help of these volumes :) and-hence the four sects mentioned just before I sat down, on the question, where shall this infallibility be found : for after all the one hundred and thirty five volumes lying on the table, are no better than the bible lying on the table, the Roman Catholics being judges. — They must have an infallible interpreter of these volumes. Where shall he be found 1 " Some say that infallibility resides in the head of the church : 2nd, Others, that it resides in a general council, in which the church is represented : although such a general council never sat. 3rd, Others argue, that it lies neither in the pope, nor in the council separately : but in the two combined — a 4th party says that it lies neither in the pope, nor in the council, nor in both : but in the whole church, re- sponding to any question. Now might we not call these font parties ? Do our controversies about atonement, or election &c. make us more truly sects, than do these different interpretations make parties in the Roman church ] But where shall infallibility be found 1 If this can- ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGIOX. 169 not be shown, it is of no more use to us in time of need, than a mountain of gold in the bottom of the ocean ; or a field of diamonds in the moon. I hope the gentleman will clearly ascertain this point, and make us all understand where we shall find this infallibility. We would like to know, how the combination of a given number of falli- bles will make one infallible being; or, by what laws of neutraliza- tion the fallibility of every member of the church is destroyed, and the whole mass becomes infallible. But if the infallibility of a dogma depends on inspiration, what is the use of councils, unless the pro- mise of infallibility be made exclusively to councils'? But I have no necessity for the argument which I had framed on this point. The bishop attributes infallibility to iuspiration — not to combination : So do Protestants. Therefore on this cardinal point we seem more likely to agree, than I expected. Protestants have then an inspired creed, and this gives to them all the infallibility, which Roman Catholics claim to themselves: but should any one say that the majority of a council constitutes infallibility, then we should have to enquire into the reasons of the infallibility of said majority; and for the sake of some of that class, I would here state that these ma- jorities often are very lean minorities of the church. The council of Trent debated eighteen years, during which time she held twenty five sessions. In one session th-cre were but forty eight bishops, and they not the most learned. A majority of these determined that the apo- crypha was inspired, and that it with the Vulgate Old and New Tes- tament; was of paramount authority in the church. Twenty five bishops, a majority of forty eight, represent the whole christian com- munity ! The question now is, were these men inspired while they were voting this dogma? I wish the bishop to state his views on this point clearly, if indeed he thinks that inspiration is at all an attribute or a gift promised to majorities however loan. But, my friends, when you have got this ponderous creed from the decisions of general councils, must it not be interpreted ? Must not the dogma of a majority be also interpreted? And who is to interpret them? Every man for himself] Then are you Protestants; or, Ro- manists working by the Protestant rules. After all, I see nothing gained by all this expensive and ponderous machinery. Is not every Roman Catholic obliged to judge for himself on the meaning of every dogma, and whether he oiught to receive or reject it? Then, I ask, are not the inspired verses of the Old and New Testament as easily interpreted,as the inspired decrees of thes(> councils ? Did not the Spirit that inspired the aposlbs, teach as clearly, as the falhrrs in their coun- cils? I wish to understand the bishop more accurately on these points. The gentleman (I regret to state it) spoke of Protestants as hating the Roman ('atholics, from a supposed ignorance of their creed. For myself, and for Protestants generally, I disavow the idea, and the Idnguagt; of hatred towards Romanists, as such. We feci the same humanity and benevolence towards Roman Catholics, as men, as to Protestants. We always discriminate between tenets and men, a system or theory, and those who hold it. With open arms, I would welcome to our shores the oppressed of all nations, Romanists and Protestants. I would extend to the Roman ('atholic every facility to improve his condition by immigration into this favored land, provided only I were free from all suspicion, that his faith in the pope and P 33 170 DKBATK OS THIS molher-cliurch, would not induce him or Ills children to wrest from me or mine, that freedom and liherty which I would pladly participate with him. I oppose his religion ; hecause, 1 sincerely tliink it enslaves him, and would enslave me, if it had the power. But, in all this there is no hatred to Roman Catholics as men. We are devoted to American institutions, because they are humane. For the sake of Romanists, as well as Protestants, we desire to see them permanent. We fear the exclusive, proscriptive, and despotic system of Romanism; but we feel nothing but benevolence to Roman Catholics. My worthy opponent has done us great honor in saying, that he knows many excellent Protestants, whom he esteems highly as good men. Of course, then, they may be saved out of the Roman Catholic church. If so, what is the difference between his infallible and our fallible faith ? I cannot find time to reply to any remarks of my oppo* nent, not made in reference to my arguments. — [Minus 5 minute-s.] Half-past 4 o'clock, P. M. Bishop Purcem. rists — I shall reply to what has been said, and then pursue my own line of argument. The Catholic church claims to have an infallible rule of faith and an infallible code of morals. The former would be of little use without the latter. So intimate is the connection between sound faith and sound morals, that we hold that if the Catholic code of morals is vicious, she is not infallible in doctrine. If the working of her code of morals is proved to lead, or to have led, into vice, she is not infallible. This never has been proved, nor ever can it be. But the contrary to this has been proved, and its proof is cumulative. The darkest ages furnish some of its brightest illustrations. She does not pretend to be infallible in discipline, in the sense of its im- mutability. The gentleman confounds discipline with morals, and this want of clearness of ideas is the source of the entire difficulty. Discipline, I think, I have explained. It regulates the dress of the clergy, the liturg'ical language, the time of singing hallelujah, the mode of shaving the head, or making the tonsure, the giving of the cup to the laity, the use of leavened, or unleavened bread for the sa- crament, selection of days for feasts and fasts, &C. &c. The church must have the power of changing in these respects-^in other words of adapting her discipline to times, and countries. And all this, so far from being an imperfection is a proof of her perfection, of her having been established by Jesus Christ to teach, and guide, and sanc- tify all nations for ever. I did not state the crude proposition, which the gentleman has attributed to me, viz. that the pope is as fallible as I am. I would not compare myself thus to him. I occupy an humble station compared to his, and I am conscious of the want of those em- inently distinguished qualities of head and heart which compose his character. He has grace and lights which I have not. The gentle- man tells Protestants a flattering tale, that they have as infallible a rule, as Cathojics. This is keeping the word of promise to the ear and breaking it to the heart. Does he not in the same speech, ac- knowledge that their fallible opinions, doctrines, traditions make their own rule, the bible, vain and nothing worth ? The bible is a dead let- ter — all pretend to find their conflicting tenets in it. Where is then, the infallible rulel Does he not charge Protestants as well as Cath- ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 171 olics with error. And why T The gentleman said, where is the use of the head, without the body ! I ask where is the use of a body without a head ] And he said, if the body regulates the head it is anomalous. But what is it that sends vitality to the head ? Is it not the heart with its healthful pulses and its quickening current 1 The pope is the head — the council is the heart — and I have no objection to his calling the laity the members, to continue the figure. While there is no schism in the members, no separation of the head or of the heart, all is soundness and life — so in the church — pope, pastors, and laity. United we stand, divided you fall. The true theory of the church, like that of the human body, is union. Ask not, does the heart, alone, or the head alone, or the members alone contain the vital principle — they sympathize ; they live and move and have their being together. God seems to address himself to the head and to the heart in the revealed definitions of his essence. " I am who am," and " God IS LOVE," one of these definitions is for the reason, the other for the affections; one for the Old Testament, the other for the New. Both, however, come from the same source and tend to define Him — liiFE, Wisdom and Love. The division of truth into objective and subjective is correct — but objective revealed truth is the tchole truth revealed by God, wherever found and in whatever manner conveyed. What is the use of this, without subjective truth, or our own knowledge and conviction that we possess objective truth, and that we are si/re of possessing iti Of this, the Protestant, who rejects authority in religion, and pretends to find out religion for himself, from a book, which he acknowledges, fal- lible men handed to him, can never be euro. The fact, the testimony, the belief of the testijuony, the feeling consentaneous with the belief, and the correspondent action, are all human faith and natural feeling, struggling, and striving for some higher and bitter gifts, which it can- not attain without infallible assurance, without the Catholic rule. What is the testimony that might be deceived itself and niight deceive me 1 He says we (Jatiioiics have a very broad rulc-^i;35 folios. No such thing. We have a (juitf couvciiiirit pocket-rule. It is the pearl of freat value — a diamond, with w hich we cut the brittle glass of mere uman creeds in pieces, and wjllj which we solve every difficulty. It is this : " I believe in the Holy Catholic church." They were tho apostles — he was Christ wlio gave it to us. It does not supj)ose ig- norance, or servile actjuieBcence. It lifts us above error, giving us a divine warrant for every tenet of our faith, and directing our under- standings and hearts to God, who speaks to us by his church. I hope I did not understand my friend correctly this morning, but if I have he has uttered horrid blasjjhemy. I understood him lo say that God could not have given a perfect rule (to make man infallible, and prevent him from error.) Mr. ("amphell explained. He had said that God could not create a hill without a valley — could not make man a free agent and bind him. Bishop PurirEM,. (/'ould not (iod have created tlie angels so that they could not fall into sin? Mr. Campiiell. 'I'here can be no virtue nor vice, without liberty of choice : neither in man nor in angel. Bishop PuRfCLi,. My friend lias said that Ciod could not have cre- ated angels or men virtuous without making them free to sin. The angels of heaven are not free to do wrong, ar« they not virtuoa« ? 172 DEBATE ON THE Mr. Campbell. If such is the nature of angels, they are virtuous by nature. Perfect liberty consists in acting in unison with our na- ture. Bishop Purcell. Then the angels arc virtuous without being free. If the rebel angels were virtuous by nature, how did they happen to fain And could not Cod have made the angels who are now good, by nature, or by grace, such from creation ■? I will now continue my argument. It does not exceed the power of God to make man infal- lible. Christ was infallible; for he was God. Now if he could make twelve men infallible, as Mr. C. admits the apostles were, why could he not perpetuate the same power in favor of his entire church, since such infallible authority to teach his true doctrine is as necessa- ry now, as it was at any former time % Now I have another strong argument here — it is old with us, but suggested anew by readifig one of the Protestant papers, from New York. It is the Palladium, and my friend seems to know the editor, for he himself has given occasion for the very article in question. The argument is this : If tradition be fallible, and it was not known for 300 years, what books of the bible were genuine, and what spu- rious, how shall we ascertain that we have the bible 1 How shall we ever know that the book is the book of God 1 The making of the ca- non or list of books composing the inspired volume, was a difficulty yielding to but few others in magnitude, during the first four hundred years of Christianity, when, if we must believe my friend, infallibility had departed, with the last of the apostles, to heaven. How then can we be sure that our present canon is correct? Catholics can be sure on this vital point, for they have the voucher of ^n infallible guardian of the holy deposit, for its correctness; but Protestants, who have no such tribunal to enlighten them, how can they be sure? Catholics hold that infallibility was promised to the church by Jesus Christ. Its testimony is heard in a general council, or in the pope's decision in which all assent. The church can subsist without a general council, General councils are not essential — though frequently of use, because, though we all believe without cxcepUnn, that the pope's decision, in which, after it has been duly made known, all the bishops of the Ca- tholic world acquiesce, is infallible, still the decision of a general council declares in a more impressive and solemn, though not more aur thentic, manner, the belief of tire Catholic world on the contested doc- trine, and thus more effectually proscribe the contrary error. The celebrated Protestant, Leibnitz, remarked that there could be no cer- tainty of a correct decision on religious matters, equal to that afforded by the decision of a general council. The four sects Mr. C. speaks of all agree in the belief of the infallibility of the church representa- tive and of the church responsive; if I must employ these technical terms — and as he asks " could not the Holy Ghost, who inspired the apostles, teach as clearly as the Fathers in their councils ?" I answer, ' Yes,' and he has so taught us to "heau the church," for, tio prophe- cy nf scripture is of any private interpretation. Let me now vindicate the humblest Roman Catholic of my flock, or of the world, from the charge of pinning his faith to the sleeve of any man, or of surrendering his conscience to the keeping of his priest. Catholics do not believe because the priest tells them to believe, butbe- cause they consider him to be the faithful interpreter of Christ and the BOMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 173 organ of the church, but should he dissent from the oracles of God and his ecclesiastical superiors, that moment they Avould quit him. They see his teaching- accords with that which they have heard from others, which they have read, as the Catholic doctrine. If they doubt, they ask other priests, or the bishop. Thus while they know the priest to be orthodox, they hear him, or rather the church, they hear God and they believe God. And in this there is no servility. The faith he teaches and the moral law he expounds, have both come from God, and to God they owe and pay their vows. My friend misapprehends me. I did not say that Protestants haled Catholics. I say that some Pro- testants are often prejudiced against them, and I wondered they are not more so. If he could prove the odious proposition so long before you, the Catholic church would be a monster. I am sorry my friend has misunderstood the doctrines of the Catholics, and I am glad of the op- portunity which is thus afforded me, of coming before the public and showing what are our real sentiments. I come to the doctrine of infallibility again. I will begin my argu- ment this evening, and conclude perhaps to-morrow morning. I beg leave to read what I have myself written on this subject : Whoever reflects upon the countless varieties of human character, the ignorance of some men, the prejudices of others, the passions of all, will scarcely require that we should expend much time or labor to prove, that as long as men are commanded to form their religion for themselves, even though the book ihey receive for their guide should be the plainest in its language that divine wisdom could bestow, the sources of error will be never drained. No matter how pure the doctrine of that book, how holy its precepts, how luminous its evi- dences, occasions will occur, when these doctrines will be contested, these precepts denied, tiiese beaming evidences obscure to the pride, the voluptuousness, and the love of independence, inherent in a per- verted nature. Man, under the influence of such feelings, will read, will write ; he will communicate his doubts and impart his prejudices to others; he will originate new creeds, and form new sects ; he will raise altar against altar, and desk against desk ; nor will any one, consistently with Protestant principles, have a right to ask him why he does so. At the beginning of the sixteenth century, when the right of forming r<;iigion, every man for himself, and tiie bible for \is all, was first jjromulgated, the fierco self-coristitiitrd apostle sounded a deafening peal of defiance, and dcnounctul ail authority in religious concerns as spiritual tyranny. " Read the scriptures !" he vociferated to the astonished crowd of wise or foolish, learned or unlearned, that thronged to hear him. " Road the scriptures, and judge for yourselves : your reason and tin; sj)irit will enable you to understand them, as eas- ily as you can discern hot from cold, or sweet from bitter. Read tho scriptures : they that run may read. Judge for yourselves !" They did read, they did judge for themselves; aiul they decided against their aposth'S, aiui against one another! " When hell," says an illustrious writer, " prepares some terrible calamity for mankind, it flings upon the earth a pregnant evil, consign- ing its development to time." The time for the (levelopment of this raiscliief was brief. The word was uttered, and it could not be re- called : the prinriple was eslablishcjd, wliifh it w;ts tonlatt! to rescind. The disciples of tho new apostles, reading, judging, deciding, became p2 174 DEBATE ON TIIK apostles themselves. They claimed the right their teachers exercised. They claimed it to change, as they had changed. The Lutherans, muUitudes of them, hecame Calviiiists ; Calvinists, Independents; Independents, Anabaptists ; each sect the prolific parent of twenty others, all differing from one another, as much as each one differed from its parent — innovation. Mark now the inconsistency to which the evil working of this scheme reduced the first claimants of a right unheard of for fifteen centuries. " Obey !" they now cry aloud, with terror, "obey your superiors; submit to the pastors whom God has appointed to rule the faithful. It is their duty to instruct you, yours to follow the guidance of their wisdom." " What," they exclaimed, " becomes of the subordination which the scriptures so frequently en- join, if each one can be the arbiter of his own belief? What becomes of humility, which religion so forcibly inculcates, if every individual f (resumes to be an oracle and a judge 1 Wiiat would become of civil aw and social harmony and order, if the acts of our legislatures were left to the interpretation of every interested litigant] Forbear! for- bear !" Such was the restraint, as every one knows, which Luther was under the inevitable necessity of imposing on the first followers of his revolt, in order to counteract the'elTects of the disastrous prin- ciple of mental emancipation, so highly eulogized when it was first proclaimed, and received with so much enthusiasm, until it was found to be a very Babel of the confusion of all creeds — another name, or else a cloak, for deism and positive infidelity. When we reason on principles rightly understood, whose immediate bearings and remotest consequences have been exposed to the examination of the reflecting world, for the last three hundred years, these arguments are as con- clusive to-day, as they were when first urged ; and when the right of any individual to believe whatever errors he honestly conceives to be truths revealed in scripture, is contested, he may say to his accusers, in the eloquent language of the Protestant remonstrants to the synod of Don (itself Protestant), which had infringed their privileges in this respect: "Why exact that our inspiration, or our judgment, should yield to your opinion'? The opinion of any society, our apostles, the first reformers, declared to be fallible; and, consequently, to exact submission to its dictates, they, with great consistency, defined to be tyranny. Thus they decided with regard to tiie church of Rome; and you, yourselves, have sanctioned their decision. Why, therefore, ex- ercise a domination over us, which you stigmatized as tyranny in a church, compared to whose greatness you dwindle jnto insignificance. If resistance to the decisions of our pastors be a crime, then let us wipe out the stain of our origin, and run back together to the fold of Catholicity, whicii you and we have abandoned. If such resistance be no crime, why require of us a submission which we do not owe you. Allow us to differ from you, as you do from the parent church." From the unanswerable logic of this remonstrance, the conclusion follows irresistibly : 1. That every society formed on Protestant prin- ciples, being essentially fallible, none should assert the inconsistent pretension of controlling faith by authority, or of regulating creeds, under pretence of superior wisdom. 2. That no such society, and, therefore, no individual, in such society, can be sure of being in the right, as long as his Protestant neighbor, with as many resources of information, and as piously inclined as himself, has embraced the very ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGIOX. 175 contrary of his opinion. 3. That as the entire system is based on the possibility of each one's beino; mistaken, vhere the most learned and pious have adopted such opposite conclusions, no one can ever make an act of divine faith, which is incompatible with uncertainty, and much more so with error. 4. That, as long as such a principle is up- held, there is no hope of union, no security ; consequently, that either the whole system is false, or some expedient of union and unity must be discovered, to induce any conscientious and rational inquirer after truth, to believe that the Protestant society exemplifies the efficacy of the prayer of Christ for his disciples, the night before he suffered, that " Ihey may be made perfect in one^ We entreat our readers seriously to look into the different religions professing to have been founded by Jesus Christ, and seriously ask themselves the question, in which of all these, that " perfect oneness" (which, better than all other proofs, establishes the divinity of the Son of God, and convinces the entire world how much his heavenly Father loved him, and those whom he had given to him) may be found. Let not this inquiry be neglected, fioryet performed lightly : eternal life or death may be the consequence of its good or bad prosecution. Error in religion, when it results from the neglect of sincere and prayerful enquiry, is criminal. This no intelligent Christian will de- ny. God is as essentially the God of truth, as he is the God of vir- tue. He can no more sanction error, than he can tolerate vice. His right is as absolute to the submission of the understanding, as to the obedience of the will; and as he, who violates one commandment will not be saved for the observance of the rest, so he that rejects one truth, which Almighty God has revealed — not that we may ex- amine, contest, adopt or reject — but that we may believe it, has lost the merit of saving faith. It is to fix the otherwise perpetual varia- tions of the human mind, and secure the anchor of our faith, not in the moving sands of man's vacillating Judginriits and uncertain opin- ions, but by lodging it deeply and indissohibly in the roc/?- which the Divine Architect has made the foundation of his church, and against which the winds of error and the rain of dissolving scandal will rage and beat in vain, that the ]Vurd made Flesh vouchsafed to become the I^ight of the world. The misfortune of the great majority of mankind at the present day, is not so much a blind fanatical attachment, (bad as this is) to the sect in which they chanced to ho born, or worn first instructed, as a certain latitude of principle, which has obtained the specio\is name of liberality, and \\hicli rcsolv(;s itsrlf into a fatal and uiirca- Bonable indifference to all religions, true or false. The infidel who has had but too frequent occasion to exult at the success of a wily system of hostility to revealed truth, affects to be unable to restrain hiH delight at brliolding variety pervading the religious, as well as the physical world. Diversity of creeds is as pleasing to his eye, as the discrepancy of features in tht; human countenance. Incajiahle of reasoning, out of the sphere of matUir, of which it is his inverted ambition to be a part, he; holds the diflfi rent religions profcHsed by men to be so many institutions, |)rescril>ing for each country a uni- form manner of honoring («od in public; all foundrti and having their peculiar reasons in the climate, tlu' mode of government, the genius 176 DKBATE ON THE of the people, or in some other local cause, which renders one form of religion preferable, for them, to another. The conclusion to be drawn from this doctrine, in as much as it levels all distinctions between trutli and falsehood, pood and evil, is humiliatingr to reason — but tln^ infidel, for once consistent, recoils not before it: the following is his language — " Sincerely profess, piously practise the religion of the country in which you live. In other words, born in a pagan country, adore its gods — sacrifice to Jupiter, to Mars, to Priapus, or to Apollo. In Egypt, you will render divine honors to the sacred ox, and the crocodile ; in Phenicia, you will pass your children through the fires of Moloch ; in one country, you will im- molate human victims to your idol ; in another, you will humbly bow before a block of marble, or of wood — before an animal, fossil, or a plant. Be not afraid ; God will not send one man to heaven for hav- ing been born in Rome, nor another to hell for having been born in Constantinople. Therefore, in the latter place you will cry, ' God is God and Mahomet is his prophet ;' and in the former, you will ana- thematise the impostor. A Christian in Europe, a Mussulman in Persia, an Idolater in Congo, on the banks of the Ganges an adorer of Vishnou, let not truth dictate the choice of your religion, but chance — let not reason decide, but the measurement of a degree of latitude, or longitude. Your credulous parent paid divine honors to an onion ; preserve this domestic worship — a son can never do wrong in following the religion of his father." But all this, it will be said, is unworthy of God and degrading to man. Not at all, he replies, all religions are equal — you were born in this, to practise another would be presumption. Such is the reasoning of the instructor of Emile, the theology of Hobbes, the profession of faith of the author of Zaire. " Chretienne dans Faris, Mussulmane en ces lieux, J'aurois avec la Grece adore les faux Dieux." That the unbeliever should thus eat promiscuously of the fruit of the tree of good and evil, life and death, should not create surprise. His joy consists in his being able to doubt of the validity of the proofs of religion — his only peace in life, his only security in death being made to depend on the delusive conviction of the improbability of ever arriving with certainty at the knowledge of revealed truth — the only truth, after all, it must be admitted, which it is necessary for man to know — and consequently the only truth which God is bound by all his essential and unchangeable attributes to enable us to attain. The basis of Protestant belief is, that the Scripture, this book of di- vine revelation, is the only rule of faith ; and that Jesus Christ having left on earth no living infallible authority to interpret it, every man is obliged to expound it, for himself, or in other words, to seek in it the religion, in which he is to live and by which he must be saved. His duty is to believe, what, it seems to him, this book clearly teaches and what as far as he has ascertained by subjecting it to the test of private examination, contradicts not his reason : and as no man has a right to say to another, " my reason is more vigorous, my judgment more sound than yours," it follows that every man should abstain from condemn- ing the interpretation of another and should consider all religions, at least, as good and as safe as his own. This is the infidel principle in disguise. The Deist takes the book of nature, the Protestant takes the Bible. The former reads in his book, that the Supreme Being must ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 177 be pleased with the diversity of worship rendered him by his creatures, that no one is to be more accountable for errors which, however discord- ant in themselves, when softened and mellowed by being mingled with the errors of others, ascend to the deity in the grateful harmony of uni- versal praise. The latter, with this only difference that he contracts the range of the Infidel's misapprehension of religion, and for the book of the universe takes the bible, contends for the same erroneous prin- ciple. I need not shew, its workings to this enlightened audience. They are ruinous in the extreme. — [Time expired.] WEDNESDAY, Jaxdaby 18th., Half-patt 9 o'clock, J. M. Mr. Campbell rise^ — I appear before you this morning, fellow-citizens, in prosecution of my third proposition: and as this is the fifth day of the discussion, we must proceed with more despatch. We shall then advance direct- ly to that part of our proposition which speaks of Roman Catholic uni- ty and uniformity — only intimating to my hearers, that the bishop's remarks in his last speech upon the infallibility of tradition; and his effort to make the succession of the popes to rest upon the same au- thority with our faith in the bible, will be disposed of under proposi- tion the 6lh. There are two bonds of union in all societies, general and special, — the first connects with the whole ; the second with a part, one or more individuals. We explain by examples: 1st. Take the Turkish em- pire. It is united on the divine authority of the Koran, and the divine mission of Mahomet. Acquiescence in these is the general bond of union. But 2nd. There are special bonds, such as unite the respective orders of Mahometans, as the orders of Ali and Omar. These orders are distinct: they are united by a special construction of the Koran. Belief in the Koran is like general attraction : agreement in a particu- lar view of it is like attraction of cohesion. So among christians. Roman Catholics are united in one great generic idea which charac- terizes the whole sect. That is, the belief in a supreme head of the church on earth — a vicar of Christ : and add to that, the exclusive power and authority of the bishops. " Bishops are the bond of union amongst (Jatholics." The clergy, indeed, are the general bond of union amongst Romanists. But there are also special bonds and par- ties in that society, of which wc shall take some notice. Protestants have a general bond of union in a generic consideration, as distinguish- ing as that of Mahometans and Roman ('alholirs. Acknowledging the biblf alone, as the only |)erfect and sufficient rule of faith and man- nerB, and the duty of all mankind to examine it for themselves, accord- ing to their respective abilitips and opportunities, is th«; generic charac- teristic of Protestants. It is one of the general ideas, in which are united, antl whi'-h uiiitra all Proifstants. But in th« second place they are united in a most perO^rt and unanimous rfimiicialion of that hier- archical authority which is the very essence of Rnrnan (-atholicism. I affirm that all Protralanls are as perfectly united in these two grand principles, as the Roman Catholics arc in that of a supremo head in 23 178 DKBATK O.N TIIH Rome, and ill the belief of tradition. Diflerent saints and their pecu- liarities in the Roman Catholic church are specific bonds of union, and as much heads of orders, as aro the leaders and views of Protestant sects. But the Protestants are as much united in ads of worship, as Roman Catholics. There are one or two Protestant sects, who differ in some unimportant matters, and areas repugnant to each other as aro Jansenists and Jesuits in the Roman church : but all Protestant sects unite in several essential acts of religious worship — in the acknowl- edgment of the same code of morals, and in the positive institutions of Christianity, such as the Lord's day, the Lord's supper, baptism, prayer, praise, &c. Sects and differences exist which ought not : but still they harmonize as much in their general and special bonds of union, as do the Romanists themselves. What are the Augustinians, Dominicans, Franciscans, Jansenists, Jesuits, &c. but orders (or sects) called after difierent saints, and united under special bonds and peculi- arities ■? These parties in the Roman church areas pugnacious as Pro- testant parties : communing with each other not more frequently, nor more cordially than do Lutherans, Calvinists, Arminians, &c. They contend warmly against each other. Their quarrels are as rank and fierce as those of Protestants. But this is not all, my friends. Their societ}' is divided on all the great orthodox points of Catholicism. Some say the pope of Rome is supreme in all things on earth, tempo- ral and spiritual, that he is a perfect representative of all the power of Christ, religious and political. A second class disavow these large claims — they say he is supreme only in ecclesiastical power : but that he is absolute lord of the church. A third class differ again on the ex- tent of that ecclesiastical supremacy. Some say the pope is above and beyond the councils and clergy ; and that he can annul them at plea- sure. A fourth party say he is subject to a general council, and is on- ly a general superintendent, a mere president, or executive officer — that the decrees of councils are the supreme law, and that the pope merely executes them. Here are four distinct sects, on the generic idea of the supreme head. Again there are four parties on the essen- tial doctrine of infallibility. Some say it resides in the pope alone. Bellarmine says, (and he is the organ of a principal party,) " that the pope cannot possibly err ^ Gelasius says, "The church represented by a general council is above the pope." A third party say, that infal- libility resides in both the pope and a general council united. A fourth say, that all this does not constitute infallibility, but that when the whole church shall have acquiesced in a decree, and signified it by a concurrent response, then, and not till then, are dogmas and decrees in- fallibly correct. The first of these parties believes in the church vir- iual; the second in the church representative ; the third in the church diffusive; — the fourth in the church responsive, — as some of their canon- ists have taught. Yesterday, in discussing infallibility, I said it should be in the head, if any where. My friend the bishop, says, it should be in the body : and, to carry out the figure, if infallibility be in the body, the head must be under the control of the body : for the fallible must yield to the infallible. Now, the body is the animal part of every individual, the seat of the passions and affections ; and therefore ought to be under the dominion of the intellectual and moral head : yet this theory makes this body, the sensual and animal body govern. No wonder, then, ROMA!? CATHOLIC HELIGION. 179 that the Roman Catholic church is always corrupt. But from nature and reason and revelation, 1 would incline to that party that places the government in the head. There are the powers of government, and there ought to be the sceptre. It is abhorrent to reason — nay it is rather monstrous, to have the head under the dominion of the body. But I hasten to show, that be the government where it may, in the pope, the council, or the whole body, it is always fallible. I shall begin with the head ; and here we have pope against pope. Adrian VI. did, unequtvocalli/, disoivn Ike pope's infallibility. Now, from this single fact, 1 prove the fallibility of the pope ; for Adrian was either right, or he was wrong. If right, the pope is fallible; for he avows that he is. If wrong, the pope is fallible ; for he was a pope and yet did err. This is a dilemma never to be annihilated nor disposed of. Pope Stephen VI. rescinded the decrees of pope Formosus. Pope John annulled those of pope Stephen, and restored those of pope Ste- phen. Sergius III. so hated Formosus and all that he did, as pope, that he obliged all the priests he ordained to be re-ordained. Sometimes popes have at one time condemned what themselves passed at another time ; for instance, Martin V. confirmed the decree of the council of Constance, which set a general council above the pope, and yet he afterwards published a decree, forbidding all appeals from the pope to a general council. He was certainly fallible, or, rather, he certainly erred in one case or in the other. What then is true of one pope officially, is true of all popes officially, and in proving a few regular and canonical popes to be fallible, we prove them all to be fallible. Is the second opinion better — is a general council infallible ] I will stale a fact or two: the council of Constance says the church in old times allowed the laity to partake of both kinds — the bread and the wine, in celebrating the eucliarist. The council of Trent says, the laity and unofficiating priests may commune in one kind only. Here, then, we have council against council. In the time of pope Celasius it was pronounced to bo sacrilege to deny the cup to the laity : but now it is uncanonical to allow it. The fourth council of Latoran, A. T). 1015, says, with the concurrence and approbation of pope Innocent HI., that the bread and wine in the act of consecration suffer a physical change. Then we begin to read of transuhstantiation. Coun. Lat. iv. canon 1. "Did the church always maintain this doctrine V Nay, verily, for a host of fathers; nay the whole church for the first four centuries say "the change is only moral,''' — a sanctification, or separation to a spe- cial use. llere we might read a host of fathers, if we thought their testimony necessary. The third council of Lateran, or the eleventh CECumenical council, has decreed that " JVnn tnim direnda sunt jiiramcula acd potiiis pcrjuria qua contra utilila- tem tcrUsiasliram ft snnclornm patrtim vemnnt insliluta." Con. Lat. iii. rum 16 I^bbe. Ojunril Sarrosancl. vol. x. |). l.")!?. Literally, they are not to be called oaths, but perjuries, which are taken against the interests (f the church and (he holy fathers. Now docs not ibis contradict Numb. xxx. 2, Lev. xix. IvJ, Dcut. xxiii. 23, Zech. viii. 17, Psal. xv. i, and Matthew v. "Thou shall perform unto the Lord thine oaths." Again, liie second council of Lateran, the tenth cecumonical council, forbade the marriage of clergy. For 800 years the dcrf^y were allowed to marry ! For the first COO yeara one-half the canons of councils 160 DEBATE ON THE ■were reo^ulatinfr the clorrry as to the affairs of matrimony and celibacy. The ancient churcli had not yet learned to forbid marriage to the clergy ; for with Paul the clergy yet believed, that " marriage was honorable in all." I have thus shown that the church of Rome is not uniform ; and need we farther proof tliat she is mutable and fallible; — without that real unity and uniformity of which she boasts T Have we not found pope against pope, council against council, Uie church of one age against the church of another age, and, by the acknowledgment of a pope, as much strife and party as amongst Protestants. Instead of reading that long essay yesterday, (I do not know what it was about, nor who wrote it; I paid no regard to it, it being obvi- ously read to fill up the time) — 1 say, that instead of such readings, I expected a reply to my remarks on infallibility, or on some of the great matters yet unnoticed; but without any more distinct avowal of his notion of infallibility, I am left to plod my way as before. My op- ponent admits his faith is not the bible alone, but that immense library of one hundred and ihirty-Jive folios, already mentioned. But as he is so silegt on this point, I have an author in my hand whom he has al- ready commended in this city as good Koman Catholic authority ; and, therefore, 1 quote him with his approbation. He has these 135 folios in his eye ; and on the question, who shall interpret for public use — the Rt. Rev. J. F, M. Trevern, D. D. bishop of Strasburg, late of' Aire, thus speaks : " If each of us was obliged to distinguish, among many articles, those which come from tradition, and those which do not, he would find himself, in a general way, condemned to a labor al)ove his strength. In fact, that part of the preach- ing of the apostles which they did not commit to writing, was at first confided soTelv to the memory of tlie faithful, fixed in particular churches by the oral io- itructions of the first bishops, and afterwards collected partially and as occasion fell out, in the writings of the fathers, and in the acts of the synods and councils. Whence it follows, that to prove that such an article is truly of apostolic tradi- tion, we must consult the belief of the particular churches, examine carefully the acts of the councils and the voluminous writings of the fathers of the Greek and Latin churches. Who does not sec that this labor requires a space of time and extent of erudition, that renders it in general impracticable? There are, indeed, to be found, men of extraordinary capacity and a])nlication, whose taste and inclination lead them to this kind of research; with the aid of the rules of criticism, all founded upon good sense, they balance and weigh authorities, they distinguish between what the fathers taught, as indi\-idual teachers, and what they depose as testifiers to the belief and practice of their time, and they attach with discrimination the different degrees of credibility that are due, whether to their doctrine or their deposition. The world is well aware that such labor it calculated but for a small number: and again, after all how successful soever it may be, it scarcely ever leads to incontestibte conclusions. We therefore are in want of some other means that may enable us altogetlier with certainty to arrive at the apostolic and divine traditions? The question is, what is this means? *»»*»»«*« Our author proceeds : "The same judge, the same interpreter that unfolds to us the sense of the divine books, manifest to us also, that of tradition. Now, this judge, this inter- preter, I must tell you here again, is the teaching body of the church, the bish- ops united in the same opinion, at least in a great majority. It is to them that, in the person of the apostles, were made the magnificent promises: " Go teach, I am with you; he that heareth you, hearcth me. The Spirit of truth shall teach you all truth," tc. They alone then, have the right to teach what is revealed, to declare what is the written or unwritten word: they alone also have always been in possession of the exercise of it. No other ecclesiastics have ever pre- tended to it, whatever have been their rank, their dignity, and learning. Ihey ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 181 may be consulted and heard; it is even proper this should be done, and it always has been done; for they form the council of the bishops, and their erudition ac- quired by long study, throws lio;ht upon the discussions. But as they have not the plentitude of the priesthood, they are not members of the eminent body that has succeeded the college of the apostles, and with it received the promises." Vol. I. pp. 168, 169. So then, to quote his words, as found on p. 108, " The opinions adopted by the majority of the bishops are for all an infallible rule of faith !" That is, " I believe in the holy Catholic church." But the priesthood are sworn "to interpret the scriptures according to the unanimous consent of the fathers." And if they do not, the people that believe them are innocent ! ! But how can they unless they examine all these fathers'? And what living man has read these 135 folios, with or without much care? In what a predicament is the conscience and faith of this people! Here is a task, which I say, never was, or can be, performed by man. The bishop can only fulfil his oath by teaching what the Catholic church teaches. We have our Old and New Testament without the apocrypha. They have the bible, the apocrypha, and 135 folios. Let us now compare the Roman and Protestant rules and interpretations ! Both rules, for the sake of argu- ment, be it observed, need interpretation. But it so happens, that a a Protestant bishop, and a Roman Catholic bishop, are equally fallible, my opponent being judge. As the stream, then, cannot rise above the fountain, both interpretations are fallible. Are we not equal? Where do you find an infallible expositor of the bible 1 says the Roman Catholic. I answer. Where do you find an infallible exposi- tor of these volumes 1 You have a more difficult task, and no better help, than we. The Protestants say that God can speak as intelligibly as the pope, and that he is as benevolently disposed as any priesthood. He does not require an infallible expositor; he is his own expositor. His Spirit is the spirit of knowledge and eloquence, and can speak intelligibly to every listener. As well might we say, that he who made the eye carmot sec, as tli;!t he who gave man iniiul and speech can- not address clearly and intelligibly that mind of which he is the author ! I ask the Romanist, however, on his own principles, where is his in- fallible expositor of these 135 volumes ? I request a categorical answer. Bishop P. A general council, or ihe pope, with the acquiescence of the cliurcli at large. Mr. C. How do we approach — where shall we find this council ? It has not met for two hundred and seventy-five years. How can they, therefore, settle a point between the bishop and iik; 1 Every age has its errors and divisions. Kvery individual has his doubts. Ought there not to be a general council eternally in session 1 If, then, there is none — no infallible expositor extant ; wherein is the Romanist, with all his proud assumption, sui)erior to the Protestant 1 It was three hundred and twenty-five years from Christ before the first general council; and it is two hundred and seventy-five years since the last general council of Trent; and the church has been six hundred yrars, at two periods, without an infallible expositor! To show the equality of the two parties, suppose a .lew were converted to (Miristianity. Suppose he had heard of just two sects of (^liristians ; all the rest being annihilated, but the Roman (.'alholic and the I'roteslant. He has read the New Testament. Ho wishes to join the church. He goes to the Roman f'atholic bishop, and says; " I see two churches, Q 182 DEBATE ON THE sir: I don't know which to join. I read that there is but one true church." What does the bishoj) respond ? " Sir, you ought to join our church." The Jew asks, " Your reason, sirl for the Protestant also says, I ought to join his church." The bishop shows him Jiftecn marks nf (he true church. He says, " Read the Bible, and see if these marks are not characteristic of us ; and (hen judge for yourself." He finds these marks involve the principal part of the New Testament. He reads, however, and joins the church. Has he not decided this question by examining the holy scriptures 1 Has he not interpreted for himself ? Is not the bishop so far a true Protestant] or, has he only become Protestant for the purpose of introducing this proBelyte'? There is no getting out of this difficulty. I trust my good friend will not pass it with a laugh, and a bold assertion, as usual. Has he not in this renounced his own principles, and turned Protestant, for the sake of gaining the Jew ] But, when the Jew has entered the church, and the bishop has told him he must now believe as the church believes, for he cannot under- stand the Bible : " What !" responds the Jew ; " sir, have I not deci- ded the greatest question to me in the universe ? I believed in Jesus, and I have found the true church by exercising my own judgment on the scriptures ; and can I not now judge of minor questions 1" May I not again say, that the two systems are perfectly equal ] The eter- nal circle of vicious logic — you must believe the scriptures on the authority of the church, then the church on the authority of the scriptures : or, you must act as did the aforesaid Jew, on the advice of the bishop. There is not a middle course. My learned antagonist cannot show you a middle way. But I have not yet done with this great theme. I wish to display in other attitudes, these two " rules of faith:' And, first, I shall sketch the Protestant rule. Its attributes are seven. I. // is inspired. 2. It is auihuritative. 3. It is intelligible. 4. // is moral. 5. It is perpetual. 6. // is catholic. 7. II is perfect. We will now prove this. 1. It is inspired: for, '■'■ Holy men rf God,'' says Peter, ^^ spoke at they were moved by the Holy Spirit.'" 2. Authoritative. " The word that /speak to you, shall judge you in the last day," says the Lord from heaven, 3. Intelligible, To the Ephesian converts he saith, " When you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ." 4. Moral. "The word of the Lord is pure, rejoicing the heart." 5. Perpetual. "The word of the Lord endurelh for ever; and this is the word which has been announced to you as glad tidings." 6. Catholic. " He that is of God, heareth God's word." " Preach the word." " Preach the gospel to every creature." 7. Perfect. " From a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise to salvation." " All scripture given by inspiration of God, is profitable for doctrine, for correction, for instruc- tion in righteousness, thoroui^hly fur 7u shed to every good work." All Christendom assents to this. My opponent admits the bible to be inspired. His rule makes his church a sect; for only a part be- lieve in his traditions. All christians admit our rule of the bible. \\.\s perfect. Such is the Protestant rule. Now for the Romanist rule ! The bible being a part of the Roman Catholic rule, is such ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 183 only as explained by the apocrypha, the tradkions of the fathers, the decrees and canons of councils, or in the hands of bishops ; so com- pletely humanized, as to lose all its peculiar attributes, and is made to partake of all the characters of the mediums, through which it is given to that people ; and, therefore, of the whole Roman Catholic rule, the attributes are just the opposite of those seven of the Pro- testant's. 1. It is uninspired : consequently, being human, it can have no au- thority over the conscience ; and this makes it 2. Unauthoritative. God alone is Lord of the conscience, and no man can make a law to govern it. Hence a christian never can be subordinate to any institution in religion, that wants the sanction of divine autliority. 3. Unintelligible. No man can ever find time to examine all the creed of Roman Catholics. It is constantly accumulating; and if any one had time to read it all, he never could understand it. 4. Immoral. This is that attribute which I wish specially to con- sider. The other properties arc all consequences of those already no- ticed. But this demands a candid and faithful examination. It gives me no pleasure to dwell upon this theme, to expatiate on the immoral character of the papistic rule of faith. 'Tis here, indeed, we find the root of the manifold corruptions of that institution ; and as I came here not to flatter, but to oppose error and defend truth, it is my duty con- scientiously and benevolently to expose the immoral tendencies of this system. We have heard the gentleman say, he was glad of an opportunity to discuss Catholicism, to make Protestants understand better its peculiar doctrines. I wish, myself, to hear his expositions, to see if he can make it more acceptable. Therefore, I shall endeavor to tell my story, candidly and faithfully, and give him the opportunity he desires. This is my first effort against Romanism. It was not of my selection or seeking, that I now appear before you : but as I am providentially, as I regard it, on this arena, I shall reveal to you some of the secrets of that institution, which seeks to be rooted in this Protestant soil. I shall attempt this in the best spirit: for I wish to see my opponent honorably wipe from his escutcheon any stain of the kind, that I may allege. On these points, I shall be happy to be assured that his sys- tem ill better than we Protestants can now regard ii. I say, tlien, the Roman (-'atholic rule of faith is inunnral. This, my friends, is a serious and weighty charge, and deserves to be clearly and fully sustained. Before dis|)hiying my proof, I will only premise, that auricular confession, penance, the mass, absolution, and other parts of the system will pass before us in this allegation, sustaining which, will anticipate some of our labors on the other propositions. I shall first read from the (Jatechism of the council of Trent on the power of the priesthood to forgive sin, according to their rule of faith. Aurirqlar confession, is by this infallible council declared ' necessary for the remission of sins." "The Tolrc of the priful," ta)\ the council of Trent, who is IJ THE question, for I hail with exultation such an opportunity of dispelling prejudice and misunderstanding with regard to our real principles. / ff;7/ gifc categorical ansivcrs to all the qiicstiuns he has propounded ; and, therefore, do I take up the subject he has been pleased to touch. 1. He says, the methods of electing the pope are various. But let that pass : the method is nothing. It is with his authority we are con- cerned. He has wasted much time in building up a house of sand, to show how easily he could demolish it, by sliowing that the pope is not infallible; whereas, I have repeatedly told him, that the Catholic church has never taught that the pope's infallibility was an article of faith. He spoke of some more or less important but unessential points of difference of opinion between Dominicans and Jesuits. But he should have shown, to establish the proposition before this house, that these or- ders disagree with regard to articles of faith. Their minor differences are nothing, so long as they implicitly believe every article of faith revealed by almighty God and proposed for their belief by the church, which they all hear, and which they regard as the '* pillar and ground of the truth." Tiiis is the solid and immovable foundation of their union. The case of t!ie cup given to, or withheld from, the laity, as I have already told him, is one merely of discij)line. It may now be given, or not, as the pope may see cause. In the time of Gelasius, it was pronounced sacrilege to deny the cup to the laity ; and, if all my hearers had read church history, I need not tell them, it was because of the leaven of Manicheism still working in pretended communi- cants, who forbade the use of wine as coming from the evil principle. No father of the church, however, said, that the consecration of the eucharis- tic species, is a mere ' separation,' or the change only a ' moral change.' I defy him to the proof. Mr. C. says : " So far Protestants and Cath- olics are equal ;" for, that they have also a grand generic principle, viz : that the Bible is their rule of faith, and the Bible alone. Now, I take up the organ of a numerous body of christians, the Christian Palladium, and I meet him here with a strong argument in my favor, upon this principle. Speaking of Mr. Campbell, (I mean by this no per- sonality, that can be thought invidiorrs : I intend none) the editor ob- serves : " He frequently speaks of ' the Bible alone ,-' but this is not a term'used generally by the brethren in New England, and is taught by few except Mr. C We never knew our brethren to boast of walk- ing by the Bible alone. This w^ regard as an error, let who will PROCLAIM IT. We say, give us the Bible, but not alone. Let us have A God, a Christ, a Spirit, and a ministry accompanying it. There was a law given to the Jews, and also a testimony, which they were bound to observe. The testimony of the inspired prophets did not con- tradict the law, but taught and enforced the same truths. The ancients were to walk by the law and the testimony, which was called a word. (Is. viii. 20.) What this " redoubtable captain" oi reform says, of sailing sometimes under this flag and sometimes under that, is per- fectly applicable to — " but I will not read further: this is sufficient for my argument. The Bible alone is not the rule of faith to all Pro- testants. Quakers, Mormons, &c., think not so, as I have already proved. And, now, Mr. Campbell can do infinitely more with the in- tellects of his hearers, than the pope has ever done with those of Cath- olics, if he can persuade them that the differences between Protestants, who all take the Bible for their rule of faith, are unimportant. Is the ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 187 divinity of Christ an important or an unimportant article ? One class of Bible-reading Protestants admit the doctrine; another reject it with horror: pretty unity this! The Episcopalians believe in the necessity of submission to the bishops; and eloquently have I heard the author- ity of the church advocated by them. They do not say that the church is infallible, and in tliis they are inconsistent. But will they allow that the dilTerence between them and Presbyterians is unimportant 1 Is the doctrine of a hell, with endless torments there for the wicked, unim- portant] One class of Bible-readers hold this also, and another class reject it! Alas! for the declaration of my friend, that he can prove whatever he states to be a fact. I strongly suspect a man who makes such asseverations. He is loud in his panegyrics on the unity of Protestants in essential acts of worship: they pray together, &c. If this were even so, of what avail is it, when they differ in essential doctrines. But, is not my friend aware, that this is by no nueans a fact? And what reliance can we place on his statements of what occurred centuries ago, when here, at home, and refutation nigh at hand, he makes such curious assertions 1 Did not a case occur, last summer, within sixty miles of Cincinnati, at Dayton, when the Episcopalian minister, the Rev. Mr. Allen, for- bade the Rev. Mr. Peahody, a Unitarian clergyman, of irreproachable morals and great amiableness of disposition, to preach in his church ? Did not the bishop reprimand llie vestry, and Episcopalian minister, for having previously allowed him to preach there] I think the Episcopalian bishop acted, in this respect, as he should have done. I blame none of the parties concerned, but I slate an incontrovertible fact. Again, at Pottsvillc, Pennsylvania, another case occurred. A Unitarian minister died there, and the Episcopal clergyman refused to say prayers at his funeral, because of his religious belief. What, then, becomes of my friend's vague and general assertion, about unity among Protestants in essential acts- of worship ] Will lie, then, ex- communicate the Unitarian] and, if he once begin, how many more sects must be put out of the pale ] Let him shew me that a Jesuit or a Doipinican, a Franciscan, or a Benedictine, or an Augustinian ever refused to let a member of either of these orders preach in his cinircli, or to say prayers over a corpse because of the diffi-rcnco of orders] Such a thing has never been lu-ard of; 80 that wo have unity, and Protestants have none, neither in doc- trine, nor in worship; neither in essentials nor in non-essentials, them- selves being judges. If my hearers wish for a practical and convincing proof of Catholic uniformity of faith, they have only to enquirt? of the emigrants from the various countries of Europe, who have (led from the oppression of their rulers at home, to find free and haj)py homes amongst us here, and I promise them that however awkward their appearance, hdwever broken their language, or uncouth liieir ai)i)arui, tliey will all answer the same on doctrinal points. America, Asia, Europe, Africa, New Holland, our faith is every where the same, like our God and our church. Who can make void the prayer of ('hrist for unity ] Who can disturb the church's union] Ah well iniirlit he prct.'iid to make the harmony of hi aven to sleep. Is tliis union exem|)lifRid among Protestants] The very contrary is true. And why] Because the apple of discord is flung among thern. The seeds of disorganization and 188 DEBATE ON THE death were thickly sown in Protestantism from the birth. Sects multiply without end — their name is Leirion. My friend was quite witty, about the 135 ponderous folios which, according to him, a Catholic must read to understand the doctrines of his church. But does he not per- ceive that a Protestant is infinitely worse off ^ For he must read lan- guages in which the fathers of the church have not written — Hebrew, Syriac, Arabic; as well as those in whicli the fathers did write, Greek, Latin, &c. before he can form a prudent judgment that he has acquired the elementary knowledge necessary to understand his rule of faith. He must read folios of commentators and learned dissertations on controverted texts. He must decide for himself what books of scrip- ture are genuine and what apocryplial, or spurious. For this purpose he must explore the archives of the ancient, churches, all the dusty tomes and ponderous folios of the ecclesiastical writers, to ascertain what books were regarded in their times as canonical, and what as un- canonical. And when he has, if ever, accomplished this herculean task, he will be no better off than when he began, for he can never re- ly on the testimony of those fathers, whom he considers just as liable to have been mistaken as himself! Thus he can never be sure that he possesses objective truth, or the revealed will of God : he can never be sure that he possesses subjective truth, that is, that he has a perfect knowledge of what that will is. Thus he can never be sure that his rule of faith is inspired, authoritative, perfect. / call on my learned friend to prove the contrary of this argument, if he can. And if he can- not, I have clearly established the contrary of his proposition, viz : that Protestants are not uniform in their faith, neither can they be. Now mark the difference on the Catholic side of the argument. We go for the Bible and tradition — the whole word of God, written and unwrit- ten. We take the Bible and the church; the Bible and the testimony. This renders for us assurance doubly sure. We believe that Christ established a church on earth which he made the guardian of the divine deposite. From that church, that divinely appointed guardian we receive the heavenly gift. She vouches for its accuracy, and on her testimony w^e receive the Bible, as an inspired, authoritative, perpetual, Catholic, perfect, and, explained by her, intelligible volume. But as we know on the authority of St. John xviii. 21, 25, that the world itself could not, as he thought, contain all that Christ spoke, and he always spoke to instruct or edify — as we know that Peter " ivith many other words'^ not recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, convinced the Jews that Jesus was the Messiah — as we know moreover that St. Paul com- manded the Thessalonians, 2d. Ep., 2d. ch., 11. v. to hold the /ra- t labor on the Sabbath, cannot sijp|)ort Itieniselves or their families; as they also are excused who sew upon the Sabbath, because they cannot do it on other days." Id. ib. i\. 32, 33. ( SynoptiH, pp. 52. 53. " Mcrrhandisinjf, and the selling of goods at auction on the Sundays, is, on ac- count of its beiriR the (general custom, altogether lawful." "Buying and selling poods on llw. Lord's tA>" CATHOLIC RELIGION. 199 was a synagogue which the people were bound to consult, by the ex- press command of God, and that it was no servility, it was blasphemy against God and often visited with the heaviest penalties, even in this life, to oppose its authority, or to contradict its teaching. He is therefore prepared to hear of authority in religion — in fact, the syna- gogue was a type of the church, its introduction — as the church is the fulfilment and the consummation of the teaching and testimony of the LAW. The Jew having had reason to question the truth of his religion, for which, he remembers he had often read, a better was to be substituted, and aware that the time marked so distinctly by the prophets for the coming of the Messiah, has long ago past, he looks for any religious society, that can illustrate the splendid prophecies of Isaiah, respecting the catholicity, or universal diffusion and the dura- tion of the church, from the time of the crucified one. He has only to open his eyes to see that the Catholic church extends the dominion of Christ, the limits of his spiritual kingdom from sea, to sea. Then he looks at the other denominations. He finds none of the qualities of such a kingdom, in them. They are not Catholic, they are not old, they are not uniform. They are the contrary of all this. This is enough for him. He uses his reason, thus far, alone, because he is not yet baptized. Like the wise men, he follows the light of that star, until he reaches Jerusalem — when its light fails him, there, as the star did them, he asks, as they did, of authority, where the truth may be found, and reason and revelation concur to shew it to him in the church. He consigns himself to its guidance, he becomes a Catholic — and reason tells him, every day, he has done right. He lives and he dies without a doubt of the soundness of his decision, for this blessed security is the distinctive character of the Catholic. All other creeds based on the essential maxim of their fallibility, leaves the human mind, in life and death, a prey to the most torturing anxiety. But I have not done with this very instructive incident in the discussion. If the Jew witnesses an occasional scandal in the church, he calls to mind how Adam fell in Kden, and Aaron fell, at the foot of the smok- ing Sinai, and Heli and his Sons, the priests, fell in Silo, and that CnriRt said not, reject a religion, whose ministers have, personally, transgressed, but on the contrary, that he said : " Upon the chair nf Monea have sittrn the Scribes and the Pharisees, .ill things therefore, w/iatsnerer the;/ shall say to ynu, observe ye and do ye : hut according to their works, do yr not, for they say and do not. Thus truth in not abandonc'i ; if th«' bad liver meets his meritrd doom. I now come to all tiiat farrago of the /ienegadr Smithes translation of Liguori. My friend says the (Jathoiie rule is immoral. He ap- proached this topic with so m\ich reluctance, and with so many strug- gles, that, conscious of his having nothing true to produce against ('alholir morality, 1 was going to say to liini, "spkak oi.r." Hut I didn't, and now he has said all. Well, what does it amount to ? Why to this, that the Catholic church is blackened, but beautiful (Nigra num, Bed formosa, as the spouse saj's in llu* canticle). She is, though misrppru shall forgive, they an; forgiven, and whose sins you sliali retain, thi-y are retained : Whatever you shall bind on earth, it shall he hf)un(l in Heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth, it shall br; loos^td in Heaven." .John xx. '■2-Z, 2.'{. And my friend quoted St. Thomas Aquin, and St. Augustin, as well as Liguori, for the holy rules the pnest must observe, in hearing confesflions. Tiiat establishes the im- 202 DEBATE O^ THH portant fact, that in the last century, and in the fourteenth, and as fat back as the fifth age, the practice of confession existed, as it does at the present day. In every age from the time of Christ it has been practised, and experience has proved it the most effectual restraint that religion has ever imposed upon vice, on passion, and on human frailty. Who can tell what crimes it has arrested 1 What virtue it has preserved and purified 1 What restitutions, of reputation and of for- tune it has caused to be made T How many sinners it has stopt in the down-hill path to destmction t Voltaire and Chilling^vorth and a hun- dred others, not Catholics, have pronounced the most splendid eulo- gies on confession. These disinterested witnesses will furnish you ample proof on this point. But my friend before he closed, uttered one word, while he read from the catechism of the council of Trent "^xt'ng a price, ^c." for the forgiveness of sin. Now in the name of truth, in the name of this community, I ask him for the proof, for I pronounce it absolutely false. Mr. C. explained that he did not say it was done by the council of Trent. He says that we have exalted the confessional to an equality with the throne of grace. Well might it be the footstool of that throne^ if its pure principles were carried out. On the throne, or in the con- fessional, it is the same God that pardons the penitent sinner. — [Time expired.] Three o'clock P. M. Mr. Campbell rises — The gentleman challenged me this morning upon an important point, viz. that Protestants cannot make an act of faith — that is, be rerfectly certain in their beliefofthe holy scriptures, or of Jesus Christ, accept the challenge. It now only remains for him to appoint the time when, and the place where, and I will meet him on that point. But that is not the question for to-day. Let him not think to take me off, by raising incidental and foreign questions. They may remove the ennui of the audience for a while ; but his time would have been better spent in answering my allegations on the great question. 1 have heard not one answer, as yet, to the question, " What gives gen- eral councils their infallibility V and various other points of great moment to his cause : to which he had better attend, than to propose new debates. I will remind him of another question which he had better solve. ' Hmo can a thousand fallibks make one infallible?'' Do they, by meeting together, become infallible'? or, by an ecclesiastic combination, give out infallibility? 'IMiis would have been more in- structive than much of what the gentleman has given us. He obser- ved at one time that the Jansenists were a Roman Catholic sect. But again, he says, that they are not Roman Catholics at all ! To pre- serve the union of the church, their plan is a very easy one. When persons dissent, cut them off. While Jansenists agree with the majority of the church, call them good Catholics : when they dissent, as they do in some very cardinal matters, call them heretics in the bosom of the church : but not of it. But the gentleman's explana- tion of the council of Trent will never satisfy Protestants. The coun- cil of Trent at one session, had forty-eight bishops, forty-five of whom were very ordinary men. They decided that the Apocrypha and the Vulgate were authentic; that the Latin Vulgate is the true and B03IAN CATHOUC &EUOION. 203 only authentic copy, more authentic than the Greek original. TTiese matters had often been discussed before amongst Romanists ; but were finally adjudicated by the council of Trent. The modern doctrine of Catholics is, that a simple majority is infallible. "That the opm- ions adopted by the majority of the bishops are for an infallible rule of faith.'''' So says the worthy bishop of Strasburg; but the proof is another matter. Now the present doctrine is, that twenty-five bish- ops, being the majority of forty-eight, are infallible. The opinion of a majority of a council, then, is the essence of infallibility. Father Paul, who writes the history of the council of Trent, a good Catholic, truly ! says, ' beardless youths were sent to that council by the pope to obtain majorities for his measures — That the pope sen^ packed ju- ries, who in every question were expected to support his measures.' So provoked was the good Catholic with the aberrations of Trent, that he solemnly asserts that the bishops o^ Trent were "a pack of incar- nate demons." I think I quote his yery words. He was complaining that the pope had hired and sent oft' young men from every part of the empire to vote as he pleased to dictate. So much for the infalli- bility of oecumenical councils. My friend has pronounced glowing encomiums upon the pure vir- ginity of the Roman priesthood, and has extolled the purity of celib- acy, as essential to perfect holiness. That these priests have not been such immaculate purities, half the decrees of these very councils attest. Half their legislation is ird and the Kini^, but surely not with the same kind of worship. The rxleripr act appeared the same, but in the heart, there was distinction of homage. If it lie wrong and an outrage to the mediation of Chriat to seek inferior intercessors with God, why did Paul ask tlie prayers of tlio christians to whom ho ad- ^12 DEBATE OX THB dressed his epistles ? "Why did God command the importunate friends of Job to ask the just man's prayers for thcin ] Why did he appoint a priest to offer gifts and sacrifices for sin ? And why did the apos- tles teach us to say, " I believe in the communion of saints." // was $tran!^e, said king James, to the Scotch bishops, to allow those honorable places in the churches, to utiicorvs, Horn, and devils, (griffins) which were refused to prophets and apostles ! " Let them not lead people by the tu)se,^' says Dr. Herbert Tliorndike, Prcltemlary of JVest minster, " to be- lieve they can prove their supposition that the pope is anti-christ, and the papists idolaters, when they can rw/." Just Weights and Measures, p. 11. " It is a shame to charge men with what they are not guilty of, in order to make the breach wider, already too wide." Dr. Mon- tague, Prot. bishop of Norwich, Inv. of Saints, p. 60. Another proof of immorality is the distinction between material and formal sins ! This is a just distinction. The civil law recognizes it. An injury done with malice aforethought, or formally , is very different, as to the guilt of the agent, from accidental and unintentional injury. A child, a maniac, a man in his sleep, or otherwise unconscious of what he does, and not the culpable cause of that want of conscious- ness, may inflict an injury, with impunity, for which liberty, and life should, under different circumstances, be very justly forfeited. My friend has brought up casuistry. The tendency of such punishments is salutary : and if a severer penalty is inflicted for the murder of a priest, Lc, it is to preserve the inviolability of religion, which watches over the rights of parents, to the fear and love of their children, and of the law. to the obedience and respect of those for whose preserva- tion and wellbeing it was enacted. My learned friend traduced the clergy of the Catholic church and described the dangers of the con- fessional. As well might he denounce the medical profession. He read numerous extracts from publications of Smith, Slocum & Go's joint-stock concern, for the def\imation of innocence. He may sit down, in the lowest places, with these worthy associates, if he will. I shall not molest them in their calculations of the '■'■ pieces of silver.^* " I will leave them alone in their glory." The gentleman allows that auricular confession was the law of the church in the fifth century. This is generous, and he is contradicted in the concession, by some Protestants, who, for want of better knowl- edge, give the institution a later date. It remounts, however, farther up the chain of holy usages, viz. to the time of ('hrist, who gave such power to men as that expressed in the text, St. John, xx. 22, 23. This power was not to be exercised without a knowledge of the dis- positions of the sinner, and this knowledge could only be obtained from his own confession. Leo I. did not, therefore, ''open the floodgates of impiety by substituting private for public confession," The practice is of divine institution, and how horrid is it not, to speak thus of what all ages and nations of Christianity, the Greek and the I.alin churches and the sects of the east, have ever held as the work of Christ, taught by himself and every where jireached by his apos- tles ! Tertullian and Origen, who lived in the age next to the apos- tles, hold the following language : " If you vnthdraw from confession, think of hellfire, which confession cxtingtiishes." '■>Look carefully about thee in choosing the person to whom you confess — confess to hi my our most tecrct xzm." " // is necessary,''^ says St, Basil, in the Ath century, " to con- feu our tins to those to whom the dispensation of the divine mysteries it ROMAN CATHOLIC EELIGIOX. 213 committed.''^ " Let no one" says Si. .Augustine, *' say to himself; ' Ido penance to God, in private.^ le it then in vain that Christ has said, what- soever you loose on earth, shall be loused in heaven ? Is it in vain that the keys have been given to the church ?" These texts abundantly prove that auricular confession was practised before the time of Leo 1. in the fifth century, and consequently that Christ and his apostles must share the odiunn in which my opponent presumes to involve the Catholic church. He says the practice of the public confession of sin, before the whole congregation, was the last entrenchment against the rapid declension of morals in the fifth century. And yet with glaring inconsistency, after contending for the practice so vehemently, in almost the same breath, he tells us : "There is no ear but God's, to which our errors or our faults ought to be confessed, for that the secrets of all hearts are his." Can there be contradiction more palpa- ble ] And does not the Catholic practice save the sinner's honor, gently withdraw him from the downward path to ruin, admonish him of his ingratitude and restore him to religion and to society a better man, in all probability to sin no morel " Is there more condescension or mercy in a Roman priest," asks my opponent, " than in God ]" Why, the blasphemous question might have been put to Christ by the leper, when the Savior ordered him " to go show himself to the priest." Malth. viii. 4. " Js tiiere more condescension, or mercy, in a Jewishpriest than in Godr My friend quotes St. James, " confess your sins to one another :" but he takes care to omit the antecedents and the coiistquents of the text. *' Is any man sick among you. Let him bring in the priests of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord, and the prayer iffailh sfiall save the sick man, and if he be in sins, they shall Ije forgiven him.''' James V. 14.- Is not obedience to the directions of the Holy Ghost, the calling in of \\\c priests and availing himself of their ministry, the indispensable condition prescri- bed by God himself,, in the scripture, for the cure of the corporal mal- adies, but, much more, of the sins of the fiick man T Could my friend have bt^en more elTectually refuted thuu he evidently is by e text of his own selection ? [Time expired.] Four o'clock. F, M. Mr. Camtbem, risn — From the beginning 1 have said, and I repeated it yesterday, that 1 would not state any fact which I could not sustain. I do not care how often I am put to the test. I have here three catechisms, in which the second commandment is omitted, and to keep up the number ten, they have made two out of the Iflth. Here are two catechisms, published l)y the autliority of the Iloman (Catholic church, 'i'he title of one, from the highest authority since the council of Trent, is as follows : — " The most Rev. Dr. Jnmt-l BuIUt'ii catrrJiiBm : revised, rnlnrf^ed. npprovrd. And reconiiiifndcd by four Roiiiiin Catholic Arrhbinliops of Ircliinil, an a pfnci«l cnJcrhinni for Ihc Itin^docn. SiifTrr little childn-n to come to iiir, and forbid thrill not, for of mirh m (he kin^^doiii of (Jod. Mark x. I'l. Thin Ib rlrrnal life, that thfy iiiif^ht know thcr, llic only tnic! (lod, and Jrsin CliiiHt. whom thou hatt gent. John, xviii. ;j. Tw»lfth eijition: cari^fiiily rorrrrted and iiii|)rovrd, with Bniendnif.nti. liublin; iViiiled by Richard Coynr, "1. (,"ap«:l «t. Hookseller end Printer to the R. C. C'ollcjje rjf St. Patrick and Maynooth, ood publisher to the Catholic Biahopi of Irclaud. I82G." [See tiugc 36. T 28 214 DEBATE ON THB Q. " Say the commandments of God. A. 1. I am the Lord thy Goil; thou shalt have no strange gods befora in*. 2. Thou shalt not take ihe name of the Lord thy God in vain. 9. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife. 10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods. Kxod. xx." Are these the ten commandments of God, as all Roman Catholic children are taught !! The single fact that the four archbishops of Ireland, and the Rom- an Catholic college of Maynooth should have impiously dared to Btrike one commandment from the ten, which God wrote on two tables with his own finger, and should have changed and divided the tenth into two, speaks volumes in proof of my allegataagainst the Romanist rale of faith. But we shall hear another witness — Title: " The General Catechism revised, corrected and enlarged by the Right Rev- erend James Doyle D. D. Bp. &c. and prescribed by him to be taught through- out the diocese of Kildaire and Lerghlm. [Motto the same as in the other, ster- eotyped and printed at Dublin by the same printer, A. D. 1827. J See. p. 25. Q. Say the ten connnandnientsof God. A. I am the Lord thy God; thou shalt not have any strange gods before me. Thou shalt not make to thyself neither an idol or any figure to adore it. 2. Thou jhalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord fvill not hold him guiltless that shall take the name of the Lord bis God in vain. 9. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife. 10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods." This merits the reprobation pronounced on the preceding. Again : here is an American catechism. — Yes, in this land of bibles has been published a catechism, in which the same liberty ia taken. Its title is : " An abridgement of the Christian doctrine, with proofs of scripture on points controverted, by way of question and answer : composed in 1619 by Rev. Henry Tuberville, D. D. of the English college of Douay : Now approved and recommended for his diocese, by the right Rev. Benedict bishop of Boston, This is the way, walk ye in it." Isa. XXX. 21. New York; published by John Doyle; No. 12. Liber? ty street, stereotyped by A.Chandler. 1833." See p. 54. " Q. What is the second conmiandnient ? A. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain." Is this the second commandment? It is not. That child is taught falsehood, which is taught thus to learn the decalogue. If the Roman bishops and archbishops in Ireland and America, in this our day can thus impose on all the youth in the Roman communion, and thus per- vert and annul one of God's commandments, to make way for the worshiping of images, what shall we say of the morality of her rulo of faith in this and other matters? It is a poor apology for this expurgation of the decalogue, that it is not so done in the Douay bible : for when these catechisms were in- troduced, and even yol in most Catholic coimtries, not one layman in a thousand ever read that bible : the catechism intended for universal consumption contained all his knowledge of God's law. What my- riads, then, through this fraud, must have lived and died in the be- lief that the second commandment was no part of God's law ! It is clearly proved, that the pastors of the church have struck out one of God's ten words; which not only in the Old Testament, but in all revelation, are the most emphatically regarded as the synopsis of all religion and morality. They have also made a ninth commandment out of the tenth, and thsir ninth, in that independent position, be- R05LVN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 215 comes identical with the seventh commandment, and makes God use a tautology in the only instrument in the universe that he wrote with his owil hand ! But why this annulling of the second commandment'? Because it is a positive prohibition of the practice of bowing down to images, and doing them homage; a custom dearer to the Romish church than both the second and the seventh commandment ! It is, however, gross idolatry. So far at least as the ignorant and unedu- cated part of the community is concerned ; no spiritual, no highly cultivated mind needs such aids of worship — nay, they would, to such persons, be hindrances rather than aids of devotion. But tho uneducated and sensual mass, which are in that community, — the vast majority, literally adore the image, and delight in the picture more than in the Oeator. And, therefore, the abrogation of the second commandment, by the priests, is the positive introduction of idolatry. The Hebrew bible says and all versions of it in effect say, " Thou ■halt not make unto thyself any graven image, nor the likeness of any thing in heaven above, nor in the earth beneath. Thou shalt not bow down to them nor serve them." The gentleman made as hand- some and eloquent a defence of the practice of violating this solemn precept as could be well imagined. He referred us to the tabernacle and temple, of ancient time full of types — patterns of things in hea- ven, &c : but unfortunately for his logic, none were permitted to wor- ship these patterns of ideas. They were but to portray the things to be revealed in the gospel age — a picture-book, to sketch the outlines of that redemption, which the Messiah wrought, and of the worship of the kingdom of heaven. They never presumed to worship them, they looked through these outward symbols, or signs of ideas, to the spiritual substance as we look through unfigurative language to the sense. The " brazen serpent " introduced by my opponent, had the authori ty of God, for its being made, and was a splendid type of him that destroyed the serpent, that old serpent the devil, who had bitten the human race. When men bitten, looked at it, they were healed : but when thf-y began to worship it, it was destroyed. I say, it had the authority of God. But where is the same authority for carrying about the bones of a dead saint, or the hair of the Virgin Mary, or the feet of Balaam's ass] Where is the first word, in favor of wor- shiping or making an image of the cross, or of the Savior, or of any saint 1 or of venerating a grave, a relic, or a picture 1 My opponent ingeniously asked, if the name of God were not a picture] Profound reasoning! The name of (Jod a picture of the same class with the image of the cross and of the Virgin! But a mother says to her infant, " my life !" and she may say to Lady Mary in the same style, " my life !" Ingenious ! I would ask this Roman Calholie lady when sIk; looks upon her rliild, and exclaims " my life," if she feels the same religious affections, the; same pious emotions, as when she looks np to tlit; Virgin Mary and exclaims, " wy ///*»■.'" Is not the gentleman rather playing [he s(p))liist, or sporting in jest, than gravely reasoning ilic subject] ('trtainly, he would not ho leach his congregation in the absence of Protestants! This is as felicitous and as rlir-loriral as his allusir)ns to the. device and images on medals, or on gold and silver coin. There is, indeed, idolatry here! But there is no hypocrisy in tho temple of mammon. Moreover, these worshiperfl adore not the image of money ; but the money itself. 216 DEBATE ON THE Next came the cherubim. What an association of ideas ! "What confusion in the mind that associates the cherubim in Solomon's tem- ple, with the image on a dollar ! Is the gentleman serious ? Did the people see the cherubim, in the holiest of all ] Aaron, the priest, only stood before those cherubim, as the type of our high priest, who offers his sacrifice in heaven : and Aaron stood there only once in a year. If he understood either the type or the anti-type, he could not adduce it either for the worship of an image or the offering of any sacrifice on earth: for, like Aaron in the holiest of all, Christ offers his sacrifice in heaven. Aaron presented the blood upon the propitiatory : but Christ entered once for all. As the bishop's high priest is not in heaven but at Rome; all the sacrifice which he can offer on earth is not worth a farthing: for in the Christian and Jewish sense, no sacrifice on earth can avail any thing. Such were the types, and such, pertainly,are the anti-types. Offerings for sin, now, are only made in heaven. The very allusion to Aaron, strikes a blow at the priesthood of the Roman Catholic church, as if God had not accepted in heaven, the sacrifice of his Son, and called for their assistance ! ! But it is hinted that I should more fully prove the immorality of the Roman Catholic rule of faith. I have no lack of documents on this subject. The saint Ligori, by the help of saint Pius VII. has richly furnished us with indubitable authority. "The attorney general of the devil lives at Rome," says my opponent, "and prevents the beatifica- tion of all saints." How great, then, must have been the virtues of St. Ligori, who, in spite of the devil, was canonized by pope Pius VI1 1 r See how equivocation is taught in this rule of faith and mo* rality : — " To swear," says St. Ligori, " with equivocation, where there is a good rea- son, and equivocation itself is lawful, is not wron^. And if a person swears without a good reason, it is not to be (-onsidercd p perjury; since, in one sense of the word, and according to mental restriction, he swears what is true." Li- gor. Lib. iii. N. 151. [Synopsis, 159. Dissimulation is variously taught. " It is lawful,'' continues Ligori, "for a Catholic, when he is passing through a country belonging to heretics, and is in danger of losing hi* life or property, to pretend that lie is not a Catholic, and to eat meat on fast davn." Id. Lib. ii. N. 15. [Synopsis, p. 216. This new old rule of faith has made some new sins, which neither patriarchs nor Jews did ever commit; and here is one of that class which no American can ever commit: " Is it a mortal sin," asks the saint, to stealasmall piece of a sacred relic? Ans. " There is no doubt, but that, in the district of Rome, it is a mortal sin. But out of this district, if any one steal a small piece of a relic, it is probable that it is no mortal sin, provided the relic be not thereby disgraced, nor, its value less- ened; unless it be some notable or rare relic, such for in^itance, as the Holy Croa». or the hair of the blessed Virgin Mary," &c. Id. ib. N. 532. [Synopsis, P- 167. There is a secret on the subject of infallibility, which the saint Li- gori has begun to divulge. Custom, it would seem, since general councils are gone out of fashion, is from this time forth to be the standard of orthodoxy and infallibility; at least, in morals. Listen to the moral theology of the Romish church on this point : " Custom," says the saint, " is defined the unwritten law. In orderthat custom should obtain the force and obligation of law, three things are required. 1st. That it be introduced not by any particular person, but by a community, or at least, by the majority of a community, which is capable of making laws, al- though, in fact, said community cannot make the laws. 2ndly. It is required e ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 217 that the custom should be reasonable." Custom has a threefold state. In the beginning all those persons \vho introduce a custom contrarj' to law, sin. In process of time, those who follow a custom that has already been introduced Dy their ancestors, do not conmiit a sin in following the custorii, but they can be punished for it by the prince. In fine, those who follow a custom afttr it has become a rule, neither sin, nor can they be punished for it." Id. lb. i\. 107. " The time required according to the canons of the Romish CHURCH, FOR A CUSTOM TO BECOME A LAW. In order that custom should obtain the force and oblig.iLion of law, it is required, "3dly," continues the saint, "that it should continue a long time with re- peated acts. In regard to the time that is sutiicient to render a custom lawful, one opinion is, that it is to be left to the judgment of the prudent, according to the repetition of the acts, and tlie quality of the matter. The second opinion is, that ten years are required, and are sulticient; for this is the length ot time re- quired for the introducing and legalizing of a custom by the canonical law, un- less it be in some place where the contrary is sanctioned." Id. ib. Lib. i. IV. 107. [Synopsis, p. 183. " Merchandizing, and the selling of goods at auction on the Sundays, is, oa account of its being the general custom, altogether lawful. Buying and selling goods on the Lord's daj- and on festival days are certainly forbidden bv the can- onical law, but where tne contrary custom prevails, it is excusable." Id. lb. N.286, " He who makes use of the knavery and cunning," says the saint, " which is usually practised in gambling, and which has the sanction of custom, is not bound to restore what he wins, since both parties know that such tricks are cus- tomary, and consequently they consent to them." Id. ib. N. 882. Gambling consecrated for priests and people by the law of custom : " We will now s'low, however, t le canons tj tne contrary, notwithstanding, that aJl sorts of gambling arc allowed. This we prove Ironi Ligori's own con- cessions. He teaches as lollows; — " The canon'*," says he "' which forbid games of hazard do not appear to be received except inasmuch as the gnmbling is carried on with the danger of scandLil. Be it known," continues he, "that the above mentioned canonical law is so much nullified by the contrary custom, that not only laymen, but even the clergy (io not sin, if they play cards principally for the sake of recreation, andj'or a moderate sum of money." Id. lb. N. 883. [Synopsis, p. 235. A new way of sanctifying the sabbath : "BuLE FIGHTS A.M) I'l.AVs AM/)\VKi). " On the entrance of a prince OF no- bleman into a city, it is lav. I'ul on a Sunday to prepare the drapery, arrange the theatre, &c., and to act a comedy, alio to .'ir>A. Hence drunkards may bq acceptable communicants ! " It ii lawful," sayn Ligori, " to administer the s.k rniiients to dninkards, if they arc in the probable flanaer of death, and had previously the intention of receivin;; thrm."' LIgor, vi. N. 81. [Synopsis, p. 260. Ignorance is the mother of dcvouon, even yet : The si.NNf.R .MUST he i.Krr iv ifJvoiiANrE. — 'I h«: iloctrine it at followt: (1 take it from the onint verhntim.) " If the penitint (says he,) is in inculpable ignoniiire, in regnrrl t'l those thing* conrcrning wliicli, it is possible to 1)p invin- cibly ignorant, although this ignonime be of the ' law of (iod,' and the mnfcssor prudently thinks (hat to ndinoni'h the penitent would not correct him, then, and in that case, the confessor inu.it abntuiii from admonishing the penitent, and mutt leave him in his ignorance." Id. ib. Heretics are still to be punished, not only by virtue of the general T 88 218 DEBATE ON TIIK council of Lateran, A. D. 1215, which says, "Let the secular powers be compelled, if necessary, to extcnninalc, to their utmost power, all heretics denoted by the church;" but according to the moral theology, as reported by the saint. Hkoetics to i)k pu.mshed. — " A bishop is bound," says Benedict XIV. " even in places where the tribunal of thuhuly inijiiisilioii'is in force, sedulously and care- fully to purge the diocese that is committed to his care, from heretics; and, if he find any of them, he ought to punish them according to the canons; he should however, be cautious, not to iimder the iiitjuisilors of tlu faith from doing their dutv." Ligor. Kp. Doc. INlor. p. 378. [Synopsis, p. 294. From the influence of all these laws, why should it be thought strange that the clergy are exceedingly corrupt? Listen to the saints How many rtlapsing sinners are involved in eternal ruin by following the directions of bad confessors! "The saint has told us, that, AMONG THE PRIKSTS, WHO LIVK IS THE WORLD, IT IS RARE, AND VERY RARE. TO FIND ANY THAT ARE GOOD." [Synopsis, p. 180. Yet according to these assumptions, under the sanction of Christ, all are bound to hear them on peril of damnation: for, " he that hear- eth you, heareth me ; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me : and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me." So, to despise these priests, is to despise God ! Once more, from Ligori, and I shall have given almost a specimen of the immorality and impiety of the Roman Catholic rule of faith, on general points of religion and morality. There is no one subject on which we could be more copious than this one : but from respect to our audience we shall give but the remotest hint. "A bishop, however poor he may be, cannot appropriate to himself pecuniary fines without the license of the apostolical see. But he ought to apply them to pious uses, %vhich the council cf IVcnt has laid upon non-resident clergymen, or upon those clergymen who keep nieces." Ligor. Ep. Doc. Mor. p. 444. [Synop- sis, p. 294. Now, if a priest should keep a riicce, it is a very expiable and tri- fling offence; but should he marry a wife, he must be excommunica- ted forever! Thus the Roman Catholic rule of faith treats the Bible, and annuls, at pleasure, every law and institution of heaven ! Have I not, then, my respected auditors, fully proved the fallibility and im* moral tendency of the doctrine and rule of faith, of the bishop's church — to say nothing of that system upon the clergy themselves, who ex- pound and inculcate it? One word, before I sit down, on the unanimous consent of the Greek and Latin fathers. I have said before, and I repeat it, if they agree on any two points, they are, in giving testimony to the scriptures, and that it is the duty of all to read them. So far they are all Protestant, and not Roman Catholic. — [Time expired.] Half past 4 o'clock, P. M. Bishop Furceli, rises — The extract from Chillingworth will be viewed by men of intelli- gence, as one of the strongest arguments advanced in this debate on the Catholic side of the question. And it may be as well to observe, that my friend has probably first seen it in the Catholic work, the Amicable Discus.'sion, from which he has quoted. Chillingworth was distinguished as a controversialist. He had a public disputation, like tho present, with some Jesuits, by whom he was not only defeated but converted to the Catholic faith. But yielding, like Gibbon, to the solicitation of friends, the importunities, the livings presented to him... BOilAN CATHOLIC KELIGION 219 or to which he was presented, by Laud, archbishop of London, he re- canted, and finally, as it is on good grounds asserted, he died a Jew. The only apology he could offer for his versatility was, that he found every one of these religions in the bible — it was the only resting place for tht soles of his feel — that is to say, he trampled upon it, to subserve the purposes of base, worldly interest ! But I have now, thank God, something more tangible to offer in the way of prorf, that nothing can be conceived more inexcusably unfair, than the arguments em- ployed against the Catholic religion. I now pledge myself to shew to every man of honor in this city, that the last allegation read by the gentleman, purporting to be from the works of Liguori, is not to be found in the works of that writer. It is all a base fabrication, I will not say of Mr. C. ; but of somebody. I will meet this charge with a complete and an overwhelming refutation. We have now come to an important crisis in this debate. My worthy opponent re- duced to the desperation of defeat, like a drowning man, is induced to grasp at anything and to resort to abuse. But this will not sustain him. He cannot now quote from Du Pin, or send his readers back to the dark ages, and draw a grossly exaggerated picture of the personal frailties of a few popes and then ask if there can be a drop of apostolic grace in the wliole world. I have three editions of the complete works of Liguori, in my library, or in this city, to refer to ; and in none of them can this vile doctrine be found. Mark, then, the pro- position, my friends. It is this. That priests are allowed to Iteep mistresses, upon payment of a fine, but that, if they marry, they are excommunicated ! 1 now call upon Cirarles Hammond, Esq. Judge Hall, General Harrison, Judge Este, Judge Wright, or any other five equally learned and honorable citizens of Cincinnati — for 1 only men- tioned the first that came to my mind — to decide this issue of fact. I pronounce the whole charge a base, unfounded assertion, and I again thank Heaven, that I am in a city, where justice will be done to the truth, and where falsehood will be triumphantly defeated. The volume froui which the gentleman has been all day reading, ia one of those books of abomination and falsehood ; put forth, in the city of New York, by Smith, Slociim and Co. and it is a fair specimen of their fashion of circulating truth. Does it not furnish strong pre- fiumplion to the reflecting mind, that there nmst be something divine in the religion which such men and women combine to abuse 1 It was the monster Nero, notorious for parricide and lust, who first drew the sword against the christian religion. Foiget not then, I pray you, my friends, the proposition that is before us. I am deLcrmined not to alumber or sleep on this matter, but to probe it thoroughly and ex- pose its rottenness to the world. Mr. Campbell's allegation against the Catholic church, is that Liguori, a standard moralist in that church, teaches, that priests may keep concuhincs by payiiiix a fine, but that if l/iey marry, they must be excommunicated. Whereas I dislinclly deny that Liguori has ever taught any thing so aborninai)le, and that all who say so, arc guilty of a most flagrant violation of the command- ment of our God, whirli says " Tiiou shalt not ijear false witness AOAINST Tirv NEIOHBOH." Exod. XX. IG. The charge of siipprrssing the 'Jnd commandment, while proof to the contrary, from the ('atholic caleehisuis every where in use in llu; U. S. and from every (^'atholic bible in the world, was staring him in the face, may be placed along side of the foregoing ! Add to these, the hardi- 220 DEBATE ON THE hood with which the plainest wortls of the Redeemer, the emphatic declaration of St. Paul, and the hiirliesl eulogy of the Apocalypse, on the superior sanctity of the unmarried state, have been violently tortured by my opponent, and a fair estimate may be made of the re- spect he entertains for tlie bible. Kvcn his jests are but little help to his argument, for error was never genuinely witty. And wiicn he af- fects to laugh at St. Paul for his liaving been a bachelor, I shall con- tent myself with replying, yes ! St. Paul was a bachelor: but would he not have looked well, with seven little squealing children trotting after him, r/siViHic the churches of Asia ! The remark of St. Paul, '• have I not a right to lead about a sister?" has reference to the prac- tice then early introduced, of entrusting in some cases, the instruction of females, to persons of their own sex, and to the greater facilities af- forded in this respect, to the apostles and preachers of Christianity, to convey the knowledge of true religion to promiscuous society, wheth- er Jewish or Pagan. I consider marriage a holy, nay, a divine insti- tution. I respect the sanctity of the union, and pay a Avilling tribute of praise to the eminent virtue of persons engiiged in that state ; but I must reason and judge with Christ and St, Paul, that if, " he who marries does well, he who does not docs better." A priest assumes the obligation of celibacy, at mature age, and voluntarily. God's grace is sufficient for him, an it was for St. Paul, and his virtuous struggles against the evil spirit, that dared to tempt even the Savior, in tiie desert, and Paul, who had been rapt up even to the third hea- ven, can make virtue perfect in infirmity, without the priest's being as foolish as the thief, who cut olT his hands, to keep himself from steal- ing. I hope however that my opponent, or his auxiliary, Smith, will not be tempted to cut off his hands, for stealing from Liguori, what is better to any man than trashy gold, his guod name. One word more. If marriage were as pleasing in the sight of God, as celibacy, why did God and St. Paul direct abstinence from marriage privileges as a preparation for seasons of greater devotion 1 According to my friend, should they not have commanded the contrary] I pass, in the next place, to relics. The chair in which the signers of the declaration of Independence sat, the pen with which they wrote the glorious document, a bit of the wood of the tree overshadowing the grave of the illustrious Washington, arc all treated with respect, and sought for with avidity : shall religious memorials alone be trea- ted contemptuously? What says the bciipturo. Acts. xix. 11. .Snd God xoroughl by the hand af Paul more than common miracles, so that even then were brought from his body to the sic/c, handkerchirfs, and aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the iviclced spirits went out if them. " The woman, troubled twelve years, with an issue of blood, said within herself, " if I shall touch only his garment, I shall be healed," and she was healed ; and Jesus turnini^ and seeing her said: Be of g(,od heart daughter, Ihi/ faith ha'h made the: whole.''^ Ev(n withut faith or consciousness, there is a miraculous cure recorded in IV Kings xiii. 21. " .Ind Eliar.us died and they buried him. Jlnd the Rovers from Moab came into the land, the same year, ^nd some that ircrt burying a man, saw the Rovers and cad the buly into tht sepulchre (f Eliseus. And when he had tnuclud the bones if Klizixts, the man came to life, and stood upon his feet." I have no doubt that these texts have never been read, or at least reflected on, by learned Protestants, like my friend, who ridicule Catholics in the pious simplicity of their souls, for venerating KOHAN CATHOLIC EEUGION. 221 dead men's hones. If the corpse of a prophet who had never seen Je- sus Christ, could impart such a miraculous virtue, as to resuscitate the dead, why is it considered absurd to invoke the prayers of the living and beatified spirit that knew and loved, and watched over the Savior on earth, and that now reigns gloriously with him in heaven? If Eliseus was good, was not Mary good ] If the prophet of the Sa- vior had so much.power, had the mother of the Savior none'? Hav- ing now disposed of celibacy and relics, I resume the subject of con- fession. I shall now proceed to vindicate the scriptural origin, the moral tendency and the immense benefits conferred on society by the theory and practice of the sacrament of penance, as held in the Catholic church, from the weighty charges preferred against it by my oppo- nent. On this subject the council of Trent, ch. vi. teaches: " the penance of a christian after his fall (from the grace of baptism) is very dilferent from that of baptism, and consists, not only in refraining from sins, AND A DETESTATION OF THEM, namely, a contrite and humble heart, but also in a sacramental confession of them, at least in desire and at a proper time, and the priestly absolution ; and, likewise, in satisfac- tion, by fasting, alms, prayers, and other pious exercises of a spiritual life ; not, indeed, for the eternal punishment, which, together with the crime, is remitted in the sacrament, or by the desire of the sacrament, but for the temporal punishment, which ihe scripture teaches is not always wholly remitted as in baptism." Such is, and ever has been, the doctrine of the Catholic church, which thus ascribes the whole glory of man's justification to God, through Jesus Christ, our only Savior. She teaches that God alone can forgive sin, and that without sincere sorrow, which induces us to detest sin more than all other evils together, the words of absolution would be a mockery ; and this sorrow may be called contrition, or attrition, the name matters little; it must be true, interior, pretcr-natural, universal, sovereign; that is to say, it rnusl come from the heart, and from a motive suggested by faith ; it must extend to all sins witliout exception, and be accompa- nied by a sincere resolution to sufTrr every evil, even death itself, rather than offend God any more. This is the only idea of penance, as a fiacrainent, inculcated by the Catholic church, and from this, it ap- pears, how horrid is the guilt of our calumniators, who, when they find us otherwise invulner;ible, assail us with the poisonous siiafts of slander and niiHre])resentalion, preteiiding, wliii(^ tlify know full well how sincerely wc rt probate the doctrine they impute to us, that the pope grants licence to commit sin, and that priests forgive it for money ! J'he power of the priests to absolve the contrite sinner, is based on the texts, John xx. Mattlnw xvi. where (Christ gives the keys of hea- ven to Peter, and Ch. xviii. l.'I, wlien/(c ilcchircs to all Ihe apostles, after brcnthinf^ on them, and liivint^ them the Iloh/ (ihoul, " Verily I say unto you, ivhutsoncr »/f ."hall bind on earth, t.hall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever ye fhall liuise on earth, thall be loosrd in hraven.^^ Uy these words we considir the priest vested with a ju(lifi;il i)ow( r by Jesus Christ, to liind or to lo(;se from sin; and ;is this power cannot be ex- ercised without a knowledge of the sinner's dispositions, especially as to his sorrow for past sins, and his sincere resolution to refrain irom them in future, which knowledge none but the sinner himself can give, we conclude on the necessity of Racrarnental confession to tho the priest, who holds tho place of Christ in tho spiriluul tribunal. t2 222 DEBATE ON TUB There is no immorality in this belief; on the contrary, the most in- calculable benefits have accrued from it to religion and to society. If my friend say that it is impious to ascribe to man a power which be- lono^s to God alone, 1 answer, that if (Jod choose to give such power to man, it would be impious in man to deny such power to God, and a grievous sin of disobedience, to refuse to use it. If he persist in saying, that man cannot be empowered by God tp forgive sin in the sacrament of penance, I will ask him, why then is man empowered to forgive sin in the sacrament of baptism? I ask, why does he Juarrcl with Catholics for employing the words — " I absolve thee rom thy sins," when Episcopalians do the same] Here is the church of England book of common prayer; and in it, I read as follows : " When the minister visits any sick person, the latter should be moved to make a fp^cial confession of his sins, if he feels his conscience troubled with any wn^hit/ matter i after which confession, the priest shall absolve him, if he humbly and heartily desire it, after this sort .• " Our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath Iff I power to his church, to absolve all sinners who truly repent and believe in him, of his great mercy, forgive thee thine offences, and by his authjrily committed tome, I absolve thee from ai-l thy sins, JTJ the name ff the Father, and rf the Son, and rf the Holy Ghost,'''' Amen. Soon after king James I. presented to the world, in his own person, the anomaly of head and member of the English church, and lord spi- ritual and temporal of tlie realm, he asked his prelates at Hampton court, what authority this church claimed in the article of absolution {rom sin? (Mark — the new Peter did not know his powers !) Arch- ishop Whitgift began to bamboozle him with an account of the gene- ral confession and absolution in the communion service; with which the king being dissatisfied, Bancroft bishop of London, fell on his knees and said, "It becomes us to deal plainly witli your majesty; there is, also, in the book, a more particular and personal absolution in the visiting of the sick. Not only the confessions of Augsburgh, Bohemia, and Saxony, retain and allow it, but also Mr. Calvin doth approve both such a general and such a private cutfession and absolution,'''' " I exceedingly well approve it, replied his majesty, it being an apostolical and godly ordinance." Bancroft was right in quoting the Augsburgh confession, for the Lutherans, the real Simon Pure of the reformation, in the confession of faith, and apology for that confession, expressly teach, " that absolution is no less a sacrament than baptism and the Lord's supper i that particular absolution is to be retained in confession, that to reject it is the error of the Novation heretics ; and that by the power of the keys, sins are remitted, not only in the sight of the church, but in the sight of Gc/f/." Luther himself, in his catechism, required, that the penitent in confession should expressly declare that he believes ^'' the forgiveness of the priest to be the forgiveness of 6'ot/." On this topic, before taking up the voluminous evidence before me for the doctrine of the Episcopalians, on this side the great water, I must produce evidence, not to be contradicted by the champion of all Protestantism. It is that of the redoubted Chillingworth. Treating of the text, John xx. 22, 3, he asks : " Can any man be so unreason' able as to imagine, that when our Savior, in so solemn a manner, having first breathed upon his disciples, thereby conveying and insinuating the Holy Ghost into their hearts, renewed unto them, or rather confirmed that glorious commission, whereby he delegated lo them an authority of hind' ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 223 ing and loosing sins upon earth, can any one think, I sat/, so unworthily of our Savior, as to esteem these words of his for no better than compli- ment? Therefore, in obedience to his gracious xvill, and as I am war- ranted and enjoined by my holy mother, the church nf England, {you see Protestants use the style ^ holy mother church'' as well as Catholics') I be- seech you that by your practice and use, you will not suffer thai commis- sion which Christ hath given to his ministers, to be a vain form of words, without any settse under them. When you find yourselves charged and oppressed, have recourse to your spiritual physician, and freely disclose the nature and malignity of your disease, .ind come not to him only with such a mind as you would go to a learned man, as one that can speak comfortable things to you ; but as to one that hath authority, dele- gated to him from God himsef, to absolve and acquit you of your sifts. If you shall do this, assure your souls, that the understanding of men, is tu)i able to conceive the transport, and excess nf joy and comfort, which shall accrue to that man's heart, w/io is persuaded he hath been made par- taker of this blessing." An accredited writer in the New York Churchman, of the 7th Jan. one of the ablest periodicals in the United States, quotes the most convincing texts from Origen, Cyprian, Basil and Gregory, under the head of antiquity. Origen (flor. A. D. 220) in Horn. 10 in Numb. " Laicus si pecrtt, ipse siiuni iion potest auferre peccatuni, sed indigtt sa- cerdole, uf possit reiiiissionrni peccatoruiii arcipere." Tiie same father, in his seventh homily on Luke, " Si enini hoc fecennius et revelaverimus peccata nostra, non solum Deo; sed et his, qui possunt niederi vulneribus nostris atque peccatis; delebuntur peccata nostra ab eo, qui ait, ecce delebo, ut nubem, iniqui- tates tuas et sicut raliglueni percata ttia." fLat. ver. ex. Taylor.) St. Cyprian (flor. A. D. 240) in lib. de lapsis. " Confiteantur sin^uli, (|urnso vos, (Vatres, delictum suum; dum adhuc, qui deli- quit, in sacculo est, duiii admitti ejus confessio potest, dum satisfactio, et remis- sio farts per sarcrdotes apud Dominiim g;rata est." St. Basil (flor. A. D. 3G0) in Rogul. explic. et Reg. Brev.; 228. St. Gregory M. (flor. A. D. 590) in horn. 26 in Octav. Pascho. " (,'aui'C pensaiida- sunt, et cum lipandi atijue itolvetidi pot«stas exerrenda, vl- dendum est, qux culpa ante, qu;e sit prpiiitentia sequiita, post culpam; ut quos omnipotent iJeus percompuortionis^ratinm \ iv illcat, illos pastoris sciiteiitinabsol- Tat : tunc enim vera est absolutio pnrsidentis cum etf'riii arbitrium sequiturjudicis." '• When Si. James exhorts all cliristiatis ' to confess tlieir sins to one another,' Certamiy it is mor(^ agreeable to all spiritual ends, that this be done rather to the curate of souls, than to the ordinary brethren. 'I'he church of K.noland is no way engaged against it, but admires it and practises it. The C'alvinist c:hurch- «• did not practise it much, because they knew not well how to divest it from its evil appendages, which are put to it by the customs of the world, and to which it is too muidi expoied by the interests, weakn«'sses, and parlialities of men. But they commendinc it, shew thev would use it williii(;ly, if Iheycould orrler it unto edification. " Interim f|uin sistant se paslori tjves, ipioties sacrnni Cfrnnm pnrlicipnre volunt,ndeo non rei'lanio,ut maxime velim hoc iibifpie obser- vari." Calvin. In«titut. liber, iii. c. A. Sec. 12, lU. And for the Lutheran churches, that it is their praclirp, we may see in Cheniinllos, '1. part, (Jan. Cone. Trid. f?Bp. 'i. (\p. I'd-nil.whn is noted tf> this purpose liy Hellnrniine ; only they all consent fhow very consistently) that it is not necessary, nor of divine inititution." Jeremy Taylor of auricular confession. " For Ihty who are tpnllrd willi sins, unleis thry be cured icilh the priestly authority, rnnnol he in the hoiom >f (he church," said Fahianus Martyr (cilea by Taylor.) 224 DEBATE ON THE Translation of the abore extracts from the Latin fathers. ■ (1) If a layman sin, he cannot liiinscll" take away his sin, but has need of a pYieit, that ho may obtain the remission of his sins. (•i) For if we do this, and rovful ourselves not only to God, but to those who can heal our wounds and sins, our sins will be blotted out by him, who says : " Behold, I will take away your iniquities as n rb)ud, and your sins as darkness." (3) 1 beseech you, brethren, lot each one confess his siijs, while he who has sinned la yet in life, while his confession may be admitted, while the satisfaction and remission made by the priests is ratified with God. (4) II behovelh each subject to conceal no passion of his soul, but to reveal the hidden things of hi.* lieurt to those entrusted with the care of the infirm. f5i The causes are to bo wi-i;.'hcd, and when tlie power of loosing and binding is to be exercised, we must see what cause preceded, and what penance has followed the fault, that the sentence of the pastor may ab!>olve those whom the Omnipotent God, by the grace of compunction, enlivens: for then the absolution of the minister is correct, when he follow! the decree of the eternal Judge. [For English divines, see close oflastVpeech of Saturday, January 21.] THURSDAY, January 19th, Half-past 9 J. M. The 3th Proposition being read — " She is the Babylon of John, tlie Man of Sin of Paul, and the Empire of the Youngest Horn of'Daniel's Sea Monster," Mr. Campbell rose and said : I could have wished, my fellow citizens, that this proposition had been nearer the close of this discussion. But as my nine propositions were first arranged as themes for lectures, rather than as propositions for debate; I could not materially alter either the verbiage or order, af- ter I had been invited to discuss them with my present opponent. "Without further ceremony, I proceed to sustain the proposition. I am not insensible of the difficulties and objections we have to eiw counter, when we presume; to prove any thing from the figurative and symbolic language of prophecy. The difficulties are not, however, so • great as at first view may appear. Symbols are exempt from some of the objections lying against literal descriptions—7%fj/7»ee.i'». The Lalin Kingdom. H=8, A=30. «=1, t==300, i=10, .==50, ,=_8. 3=2, «=1, «=200. -=10, /.=30, i==5, .=10, »=1 : The sum, 666. The conclusion from these premises is, that as there is no other king- dom on earth whose name is exactly 666- — and as the beast, the symbol of this kingdom, has been proved to be the Latin empire, and He La- tine Basi/eia, being proved to contain C66, this definitely and clearly marks out the Roman Institution as that to which the 13th chapter of the apocalypse and the Tih chapter of Daniel refer. The only question of apparent difficulty that can be here asked, is : — Whether Rome Pagan or Rome Papal is intended : for that Rome is intended cannot be questioned. That it is Rome Papal is evident from the fact that what is called the second Beast, chap. 1 3, verse 12, is, chap. 16 and 20, called the false prophet — and this is the beast whose name is given as numericaly equivalent to 666. This moreover explains that love of Lalin which to this day distin- guishes this party. They not only have long gloried in the name lio- man or Lalin Catholic or Church of /iomr, but they still say mass in Latin, and perform their religious services in that dead language ; for although I'aul '• had rather speak five sentences in the vernacular, than ten thousand sentences in an unknown tongue" — that lie might edify his hearers, — and although in the age of the " primitive Fathers" the whole chufch prayed and taught in the language of every country where they worshiped ; still for tlic sake of Latin, to this day and even in this country, Fiomanists pcrforni th( ir most devout services in that dead and foreign tongue as though God himself preferred that language to every other. Thus they are providentially bearing to ail nations and languages the grand mark, and the number of ihe name which identifies them as the beast and nabyl"n of .John. To return to the iiiiHircry of the Proj)het .Tohn : — In the ITlh chapter this ecclesiastic establishment is coinpiired to a great harlot, with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and as having intox- icated all the inhabitants of the earth with the wine of her whoredom. The woman is further identified by being described as siitin^r upon a tcarlet brnsl, fuW of blaspheinous names, having nivn /irada and ten harm; and she is adorned with purple and scarlet, with gold, and dia- monds, and pearls ; having a golden cup in her hand, full of the abomi- nation and pollution of her wlioredoms. She had upon iier forehead her 230 DEBATE ON TnE Dame written :—" Mystkky, Babylon the Great, the Mother of Harlots, and of thk abominations of the Earth." And to make the matter more certain, tlie Spirit testifies, verse 18 : "Tiie woman whicli you saw is the great city (spiritually called Babylon, literally, Papal Uomc) that rules over the kings of the earth." Having thus connected these symbols, and seen the co-adaptation to the same" subject we shall here introduce the Apostle Paul with his plain and unfigurative description of the Man of Sin, 2d chap. 2d Thes- salonians, and"examine the congruity of his description with the sym- bols of Daniel and John. He may be regarded as the literal interpre- ter of them both. " Let no man deceive you by any means : for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition ; who opposelh and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he, as God, sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things 1 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work ; only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken ouiof the way. And then shall that Wick- ed be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all powers, and signs, and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteous- ne'ss in them that perish ; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." Verses 3 — 10. The Apostle foretells ^n apostacy {■& falling away) in the Church; which apostacy would issue in the full revelation or manifestation of THE Man of Sin, (or of idolairy, for this is the sin of Jews and Gen- tiles.) The Man tif Sin is again designated as the Son of Perdition. He was the subject of past prophecy as Judas was; for on that account he too was called the Son of Perdition — foredoomed to ruin. The names o{ Man of Sin and Son of ruin, fitly represent this apostacy. The at- tributes and circumstances peculiar to this passage are the following. 1. He was to come forward stealthily by degrees and unobserved, (like Daniel's Little Horn, to grow up behind the others) " The secret, or mystery of iniquity already inwardly works." 2. He could not be revealed till " He who restrains or lets (the Pa- gan power) be taken out of the way." Political power as well as ec- clesiastic was necessary to his development. So the Little Horn did not appear conspicuous till after the ten horns grew out of the fourth beast. The Man of Sin is, in historic truth, the youngest horn that sprung from the Pagan beast. 3. He was to exalt himself above all that is called a God, or an object of worship. My learned opponent will agree with me that God here may mean, as sometimes it does in the Bible, a magistrate or king. And certainly not only in the arrogant titles which he assumes, but in the dispensations which he has granted, in respect to laws divine and human, no magistrate, king, or potentate, ever claim- ed so much on earth as the Man of Sin, as the Popes of Rome He is not only styled " Universal Father," " Holy Father," " His Holiness," "Sovereign Pontiff," "Supreme Head of the Church on Earth," " Pater Familias," " Successor of Peter," " Prince of the RO?I_\.N CATHOLIC RELIGION. 231 Apostles," "Infallible One," "Vicar of Christ," "Lieutenant of Christ," " Prince of the World ;" but he is styled, still more blasphe- mously, " Lord of Lords," a god on earth, " Lord God the Pope." 4. He places himself " in the temple of God." This ascertains the Man of Sin more specifically than any other attribute or circumstance in the passage. He is no Pagan idolater ; he is no infidel Jew ; he is no author of a new religion ; but he sits in the Church of Jesus Christ — God's building — God's temple — holding the fundamental truths of re- ligion, as did this community when the Man of Sin invaded the Church ; for, yet, the great fads of Christianity are acknowledged by the Church of Rome, though ^^ made (f no fffect by her traditions." 5. He exhibits or " shows himself to be a god." He claims to reign not only for Christ as his vicar, but the homage due to a repre- sentative of God he haughtily appropriates to himself. Such is the Erediction of the. man of sin ; and who that is conversant with the istory of the popes of Rome, from their coronation, standing on the altar in St. Peter's church, receiving the title of God's vicegerent, assuming the honors of the supreme head of the whole church ; pow- er over the angels of heaven, over the inhabitants of Hades, and over the laws and statutes of the bible, can think that Paul exaggerates the picture by saying that this son of perdition, and man of sin, was to pass himself off, was to '■'■show himself as a God.'''' 6. He is called the lawless one ; verse 8, " the wicked 07ic.^^ So Da- niel's little horn is represented as " changing (or seeking to change) the times and the laws." Instances of such dispensations and indulgences could be multiplied, ad lihitum, demonstrative that such have always been the professions and assumptions of the " Princes of iheJposllcs.''^ 7. But another incident in the history of the decline of the man of sin deserves our attention, and singularly identifies him with the em- pire of the little horn. " Whom the Lord shall consume Tor slay) by the spirit of his mouth, and destroy by the brightness of his coming." And of the dominion of the little horn, says Daniel: "They shall consume and destroy it to the end." Paul seems to have quoted the very words of Daniel, and thus most unquestionably identified the 7nan of sin and little horn as designating the same apostacy from Christ and his religion. 8. In describing the coming of this man of sin, Ik; is compared to the deceptions, assiunptions, and approaches of Satan, who has often assumed a divine mission or tlie power of miracles. So the Roman church has ever pretendt-d to the power of working miracles, and has gained and still ri'tains mueii power by false signs and lying wonders. Of this apostacy, and of the rise and progress of this man of sin, as described by Paul, we may mark his growth and progress in full agreement with the records of authentic^ history in the following order and style: — He was an eiul)ryo in Paul's time. ('I'lie mystery of in- iquity doth airt'ady inwardly work). He was an infant in the lime of \ ictor ]., 195. lie was a bold and daring lad in the time of (^onstan- tine the (Jreat. A sturdy stripling in tin? days of Leo I., when au- ricular confession came in. He was nineteen years old in the days of Justinian's code ; and a young man full twenty-one, when Moni- face ML receiveil from Phocas the title of I'niversal Patriareh or Pope, A. I). (iOti. Hi- was twenty-five when PLVN CATHOLIC KELIGIOX. 233 all things said by Daniel, Paul, and John perfectly harmonize in the suddenness and completeness of her destruction. However gradual, for a time, the consumption and decay of her strength and glory, she will die a violent death ; for ail the witnesses attest that a sudden and overwhelming destruction awaits her. But amid the tremendous daricness of this dread hour, the bright and morning star of Israel appears : for as soon as the flying angel, as it flits across the heavens, announces in words of everlasting joy, that the hour cf her judgment has come, the angel in his rear, atten- dant on his flight, shouts triumphantly from east to west: " It is fal- len! It is fallen ! Babylon the great is fallen!" Then shall there be "voices and thunders, and lightnings, and the imiversal earthquake which shall bring the cities of the Gentiles to the dust." Then will be the time when a voice from heaven exultingly shall say : " Re- joice over her, ye holy apostles and prophets; for God has avenged you on her ! Then the immense multitude of saints, — the martyred millions in heaven shall say: Hallelujah! Salvation, and glory, and power to the Lord our God : for his judgments are true and righteous : for he has judged Uie great harlot, who corrupted the earth with her fornication, and he has avenged the blood of his servants shed by her hand ! And a second time they said, Hallelujah ! and the smoke of her torment ascended forever and ever!" Then, indeed, shall the kingdoms of the whole earth become the kingdoms of the Lord, and of his anointed. Then the cause, so long oppressed, shall universally triumph : for ages of prosperity and joy are yet to crown the labors cf Messiah; and untold millions, the trophies of his mediation are 3'et to gladden heaven and earth Ly their cheerful submission to his authority, who shall then be acknowledged the rightful Kins^ of kings and Lord of lords. Such a catastrophe is even feared at Rome itself. The popes have uttered it abroad ; they have proclaimed to the world that they felt St. Peter's chair tremble under them ; — that the throne of the prince of the apostles now totters to its fall. In dolorous strains they lament in their encyclical letters the prevalence of liberal (with them infide!) firinciples. Kven in Italy and in Spain the sovereiprn jiontifl' observes ndicatione of the spirit of the arre. Free discussion, the liberty of the press, or even a whisper about free government, in the environs of Home, grievously afllicts him. It has been said by the most intel- licrent in the internal affairs of Roman C'alhoHc countries, that it would not be the most unexpected event if the present incumbent of the Papal chair should be the last of the popes of Rome. Public opinion is fast changing even in those countries, and there is an under-current which, like a subterraneous fire, is liiiuifying the foundations of the hills and mountains on which this proud super- structure rears its aspiring head, 'i'he pope is looking abroad, per- haps to the "mountaifis of the moon," or to the great vallr-y, as to a wilderness, in which there may be an asylum reared for him in such a contingency as miffht drive him from the Kternal city. Who knows but that the ecclesiastic politics of lioman Catholic Knrope have aided the tide f»f emigration prrispeciively, on the rhances that are to decide the fortunes ol the liierareby in llie Old World. Hut th(! destinies of western l{orne, the theatre of the prophecies before us, exhaust the symbols of these predictions. The fortunes of our country and of the I'apacy here, belong to another chapter. 234 DEBATE 0>- THD Whether it shall simultaneously fall iu the New world, or shall seek here to recruit its shattered interests, and seek to found a great Ame- rican Roman Catholic hierarchy, is a question of grave import, which it is not my province to examine. JSuch, however, are its oritrin, its history, and its doom in the Old world, as sketched by the finger of God. And the history of Eu- rope, for twelve hundred and thirty years, proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Daniel, Paul, and John spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. I cannot sit down without an apology for the rudeness of this great outline. It would require hours to fill up the map which I have laid before you. I have endeavored only to establish the grand landmarks, and point out the bearings of prophecy upon this institution. In hopes that my learned opponent will give me an opportunity to fortify the weak points, and to illustrate the obscure, I give place ; having, as I judge, redeemed the pledge which I tendered in my fourth proposition : for in the history of all time, no person will ever find any one sub- je t in which so many — nay, all the grand characteristics of this prophetic tyranny, so clearly, literally, and harmoniously meet as in Papal Rome. On this point I challenge special investigation. — [Time expired, plus minutes.] Half past 10 o^olock, A. M. ^ Bishop Purcell lisi s — Before I take review of my friend's last speech, I wish to complete my previous one. I was speaking on the subject of auricular and pri- vate confession, when I was last up, and endeavoring to prove that it was a practice not contrary to scripture, nor immoral. I have, in proof of this position, quoted authorities from scripture, from the ancient re- cords of the Catholic church, and from the divines and practice of the Knglish church. I now add to them, a quotation from the discipline of the Methodist church, edition of 1B.'{5, New-York. And, to show that every argument addressed to yon by my friend, falls with as great force, nay greater, on Protestants, I will read the following extract, (p. 84.) You will observe, my friends, that I do not arraign the Me- thodists, as immoral, or quote their discipline from insidious motives ; but, to show that our practice is itnitated in a way, by which it is not improved, but liable to great abuse ; and that every thing that is said against us, may be said against others. Section III. — "C/'"'« Band Societies. " Two, three or four true believers, who have confitled in ca.;h other, form a band. — Only it is to be observed, that in one of thf5eban;!s, all must be men, or all women; and all n)arried or all unmarried." p. 83. " Riilfs of lite Band Societies." "The design of our meeting i^ to obey that command of God, Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed." James, v. 16. " Some of the questions proposed to one, before he is admitted among us, may be to this elfect." p. 84. " 1.° Have you the forgiveness of your sins? (a pretty bard question, my friends to answer, when the scripture "assures us, Eccles. ix. 1, " Man knoweth not whether he be worthy of love, or hatred;" in other words, whether he hath, or hath not, forgiveness of his sins.) 5.° Has no sin, inward or outward, dominion over you? (What scrutiny!) 6." Do you desire to be told of your faults? 7.° Do you desire to be told of all your faults, and that phiin and home? 8." Do ^ou desire that every one of us should tell you from time to time, whalsofver is in our heart, concerning you? 9.° Consider! Do you desire we should tell you whatsoever we think, whatsoever we fear, whatsoever we hear concerning you? 10." Do you desire that in doing this, we thould come a« close as jiossible, that we should cut to the quick, and search roiia:^ catholic religion. 235 your heart to the bottom? 11." Is it your desire and design to be on this and all other occasions, entiitly open, so as to speak without disguise, and without reserve? {(i^J- Any of the preceding questions maybe asked ii often as occa- sion requires: the four following; at every meeting. 85. 1.° What known sins have you committed since our last meeting? 2.° What pardcular temptations have you nitt with? 3.° How were you delivered? 4." Whathaveyou thought, •aid. or done, of which you doubt whether it be sin, or not?" They must reveal the whole soul and body, inward and outward sins; and I defy my friend to quote any ihino-, even from Smith's Liguori, to surpass that. In the Catholic practice, the confession is to the priest alone ; who is hound hy holy vows, before God and man, not to abuse his trust ; and it is unheard of, that a priest has ever vio- lated his oath, by divulging the secrets confided to his ear, as the minister of the sacrament. But tell such secrets to one woman, and, as the witty Frenchman said, when asked why he began a deed with the words, " Know one woman," &c. : " Why, if one woman knows it, it is equivalent to " all men," for lliey will all know it soon enough from her." (a laugh.) I suspect, that my opponent also suspects by this time, that he has got into a prett}' badylx. I shall be amused to see how he will ttl out of the noose. Now, my friends, I have advanced Protestant testimony, to show, either that the champion of Protestantism has trodden most awfully upon Protestants' toes, or to prove that the Catholic practice of con- fession is not immoral. Did time permit, I might cite the most con- vincing testimony, from the fathers of the reformation, and from the German princes, to show, that when the restraints of tlie confessional were removed, the barriers of virtue seemed to be broken down. I do not choose to use their testimony before this audience. It is sufti- cientiy well known, and it follows from it, that my opponent ought not to speak ill of confession ; for it has every where proved itself to be a useful practice, and one beneficial to society. It has been one of the most remarkable aids to justice, in cases which legal process could not reach. To show this, 1 will relate an anecdote. Some one, in New-York, Rtole a quantity of silver spoons, and, having confessed the crime to the priest, was told, that neither confession nor absolution could be of any avail, without restitution of the ill-gotten goods. Res- titution was accordingly made. Here is a fine practical comment on the subject. The police, having heard of the aflair, insisted that tho priest should disclose the name of the thief, and wished to compel him to do 80, to promote thereby, as itiey supposed they should do, the cause of justice. The priest, of course, refused to commit a flagrant breach of trust, and modestly contended, that the cause of justice was much more efTectually promoted, by the course which a priest in such case pursued. Refilitulion had been made : was not this enough 1 The police suhpcrnaed him to appear before the mayor of New-York, the celebrated Do Witt Clinton, who decided that the priest could not be compelled to give up the name. The lawyer employed by tho priest, was Mr. Sampson, a Protestant, and an ornann lit to the bar. He reported the trial. Before reading his spefcli, touching on this very topic of the morality or immorality of auricular confession, hear the admirable, but too briff preface, he has prefixed to the volume. I am sure, every high-minded and honorable man here, whether Pro- testant or Catholic, will subscribe chet-rfully to hiw Hciitimenls. "Tho general satisfaction given to overy roligious denominatioo, by tbc de- 230 DEDATE ON THE cision of Uiis interesiing question, is well calculated to dissipate anti- quated prejudices and religious jeiiio\isics ; and the reporter feels no common salisfaclion in niakinj^ it public. When'tliat adjudication shall be compared with the baneful statutes and judgments in Europe, upon similar subjects, tiic superior equity and wisdom of American jurisprudence, and civil probity, will be tell; and it cannot fail to be well received by the enliirhtened and virtuous of every community, and will constitute a document of history, precious and instructive to the present and future generations." Having produced before the court a book called, "The Papist misrepresented, and truly repre- sented," and read the misrepresentation first, he continued : "The papist truly nprtstnleJ, btlievts it dainiiabk' in any rtli<|,ion to make gods of mm. Hovvevtr he. firmly holJs.that wlitn Christ sijeaUing to his apos- tles said, John sx. 2-2, "Receive ye the Holy Ghosti whose sins you shall for- give, lliey are Jhrgii-en; and whose sins yon shall rciaiu, they are retained;'' he f;ave thrtn, and their successors, llie bishops and priests of the Catholic church, authority to absolve any truly penittnl sinner from his sins. And God having thus given them the ministry of rcconcilialion, and made them Christ's legates, 2 Cor. v. 18, 19, 20, Christ's ministers and the dispensers of the mysteries of Christ, 1 Cor. iv. and given them power that whatsoever they loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Matt, xviii. 18, he undoubtedly be- lieves, that whosoever comes to them, making a sincere and humble confession of his sins, with a true repentance and a lirm purpose of amendment, and a hearty resolution of turning from his evil ways, may from tliem receive absolu- tion, by the authority given them from heaven, and no doubt but God ratities above the sentence pronounced in that tribunal; laosing in heaven whatsoever is thus loosed by them on earth. And that, whosoevt r conies without the due preparation, without a repentance from the bottoni of his heart, and real inten- tion of forsaking his sins, receives no benefit by the absolution; but adds sin to sin, by a high contempt of God's mercy, and abuse of his sacraments." No wonder then, this latter being the true character of confession, it the bit- terest enemies of the Catholic failli have still respected it; and that discerning minds have acknowledged the many benefits society might practically reap from it; abstracted from its religious character. It has, I dare say, been oftener attacked by sarcasm than by good sense. The gentleman who argued against us, has respected himself too much to employ that weapon, and I believe he has laid all that good sense could urge against it, which we take in very gcKKl part. But while this ordinance has been openly exposed to scotV and ridicule, its excellence has been concealed by the very secrecy it enjoins. If it led to licen- tiousness or danger, that licentiousness, or that tiangrr, would have come to light, and there would be tongues enough to tell it. WhLl?t on the other hand, its utility can never be proved by instances, because it cannot be shown how many have been saved by it: how" many of the young of both stxes, have been in the most critical juncture of their lives, admonished fioin the commission of some fatal crime, that would have brought the parents' hoary hairs with sorrow to the grave. These are secrets that cannot be revealed. Since however, the avenues that lead to vice are many and alluring, is it not well that some one should be open to the repenting sinner, where the fear of lunishment and of the world's scorn, may not deter the yet wavering convert? f the road to destruction, is easy and smooth, sifacilis 'descensus avemi, may it not consist with wisdom and policy, that there be one silent, secret path, w here the doubting penitent may be invited to turn aside, and escape the throng that hurries him along? Some retreat, where, as in the bosom of a holy hermit, within the shade of innocence and peace, the pilgrim of this chccquered life, may draw new inspirations of virtue and repose. ff the thousand ways of error, are tricked with flowers, is it .so wrong, that somewhere there should be a sure and gentle friend, who has no interest to be- tray, no care, but that of ministering to the incipient cure? The syren songs and blandishments of pleasure, may lead the young and tender heart astray, and the repulsive frown of stern authority, forbid rtturn. One step then gained or lost, is victory or death. Let me then ask you that are jjarents, which would you prefer, that the child of your hopes should pursue the couise of ruin, and cen- I E05IAN CATHOUC EELIOIOW. 237 tinue with the companions of debauch and crime, or turn to the confessional, where if compunction could once bring him, one gentle word, one well timed admonition, one friendly turn by the hand, might save your child from ruin, and your heart from una\ailing sorrow? And if the hardened sinner, the murderer, the robber, or conspirator, can once be brought to bow his stubborn spirit, and kneel before his frail fellow man, invite hiin to pronounce a penance suited to his crimes, and seek salvation through a lull repentance, there is more gained, than by the bloodiest spectacle of terror, than though his mangled limbs were broken on the wheel, his body gibbeted or given to the foivls of the air. If these reflections have any weight at all; if tiiis picture be but true, in an^ part, better forbear and leave things as they are, than too rashly sacrifice to jealous doubts, or shallow ridicule, an ordinance sanctioned by antiquity and founded on experience of man's nature. For if it were possible for even faith, that re- moves mountains, as they sav, to alter this, and with it to abolish the whole fabric, of which it is a vital part, what next would follow ? Hundreds of millions of christians would be set adrilt from all religious fastening! Would it be belter to have so many atheists, than so many christians? Or if not, what church is fit- ted to receive into its bosom, this great majority of all the cliristian world? Is it determined whether they shall become Jews or Fliilanthropists, Chinese or Mahonimedans, Lutherans, or Calvinists, Baptists or Brownists, Materialists, Universalists or Destrurtionists, Arians, Trinitarians, Presbyterians, Baxterians, Sabbatarians, Millennarians, Moravians, Antinomians or Sandcmanians, Junipers, or Dunkers, Shakers or Quakers, Burgers, Kirkers, Independents, Covenanters, Puritans, Hutchi^onians, Johnsonians, or Muggletonians. I doubt not, that in every sect that I have nametl, there are good men, aiul if there be, I trust they will find mercy, but chiefly so as they are charitable, eacii to his neighbor. And why should they be otherwise? The gospel enjoins it; the constitution ordains It. Intdlenince in this country could proieed from nothing but a diseased affec- tion o( the pia malir, or the spleen." Catholic Question in .\inerica. p. 87. I will now dismiss the question of confession. There are many things to which I should like to f/ive answers, in set speeches; but, whoever reads this controversy, must not suppose that becau-se I have not time to answer every accusation at length, there is no answer to them. I catch all I can of what my friend hurriedly utters ; for I cannot hear liim, for his occasional hoarseness of voice. When my worthy opjionent slated, in his long-blazoned proposition, *♦ She is the man of sin," I imagined that lie meant no more than the exciting of an innocuous laugh at the expense of" Mother Church," by making a man of her in her old age. How great, then, has been my surprise, to sec him, all eail set, dash headlong upon this rock of commentators, the "infames scopulos iiiterjiretum," around which are scattercfl in profusion, the wrecks of so ni;iny learned lucuhrittions, for the last 1800 yeara ! Catholics and ProlestanLs, churchmen and lay- men, ancients and moderns, Papias and Newton, and last, not least, Mr. Alexander Camplxdl, liave all egregiously foundered upon tliis hidden shoal of controversy. No wonder, the learned Protestant, Scraliger, observed that Calvin was wise, in not writing upon the Apocalyp.se. " Sajittil Ciilriniis, quia in Jlpiicahfpnin non srrimil .'" Had we a congregation of scary old women, instead of intelligent and sensible men, around us, I should expect to be looked at liy many a |>rying eye, <-onfKleul of seeing one, at least fif the ten horns, sprouting, or already strong, full-grown, and threateningly prr rnineiit from my fonliead. Hut as I address reaso- ners, not visionaries, nor rhapsodists, nor fanatics, I mnst reason, leaving to my fanciful friend, the reaioiiH of iniaginalion, into wliiefi he has down, far above my reach. — 1 would not fetch him too hastily down, but by sending a few arguments, at rispeclful dislances after one another to pluck a feather now, and a feather then from his wings, 238 DEQATE ON THE we may fetch him safely, and slowly, and with dignity back again to the apprehension of log;ic, and common sense. These are the wea- pons with which I, in the first place, proceed to grapple with the gentleman. 1st. Is he an tnfalUbk? He pretends not, verily, to be such. Then what is all his fanciful theory worth 1 It is based on reason and historj', is it 1 Well hut Hugo Grotius, and Hammond, and Dr. Herbert Thorndike, not to mention fifty others, of different religious denominations, but all Protestants, and at least as good biblical and classical scholars, as my learned antagonist, have ridiculed the notion of calling the pope of Rome Antichrist ! If only one learned nnd pious Protestant were pitted against my friend, I would be even with him, or more than even. — How much superior in this argument, when I have so many wise men on my side, while all the monoma- niacs are on his ! " Lei them not lead people by the nose,'''' says Thorn- dike, " to believe they can prove their supposition that the pope is anti- christ, and the Fapists, Idolaters, when they cannot.^^ Thus the most learned and orthodox Protestant divines cannot subscribe to — they are, on the contrary, ashamed of— this interpretation of my learned opponent. 2nd. Those Protestants, who agree with him in calling the pope, antichrist, disagree as to the particular pope to be so called, and still more, as to the time when the downfall of Babylon was to have taken place, or is to take place — as in the case of the Jewish testimony against Jesus Christ, there is no agreement among the witnesses. Braunbom confidently asserts that the popish antichrist was born in the year 8G ; that he grew to his full size in 376 ; that he was at his greatest strength in GSfi ; that he began to decline in 1086; that he would die in 1640 ; and that the world would end in 1711. (Bayle Art. Braunbom) bishop Newton, Napper, Fleming, Beza, Melancthon, Bul- linger, had all their peculiar and conflicting theories, and none of them, we may safely assert, has found the Apocalyptic key. Turien, Alix and Kelt, are in nothing more wise, and equally unsuccessful. 3d. The scripture is opposed to him. For St. John says, 1st Ep, ch. 2. V. 22. " That the liar who denieth Jesus to be the Christ is antichrist." Now this, the pope has never done ; but, on the con- trary, he contends earnestly for the faith in the divinity of Christ, once delivered to the saints. 4th. Church history is opposed to him. For it shews, at every page, how the pope sent missionaries into every part of the world, even the most distant, to gather barbarous nations into the fold of Christ, to preach to them salvation through his blood. Now accord- ing to the rule of the Savior, "a kingdom, divided against itself, cannot stand." And it is unheard of among all the signs of the anti- christ, that he was to be the strenuous, and for many centuries, the only apostle of the true Christ, the Savior. Even the worst pope, was true to doctrine, and made the beams of the sun of righteousness, of pure, christian faith, gild the villages of Tartary and cheer the roving hordes in its deserts. 5th. My friend is opposed to himself; for he said to day, that the eyes of the little horn signified wisdom and knowledge. Now as the Catholic church is the mother of ignorance, the victim of blind and ridiculous superstitions, the cause of all the obscurity of the dark ages, she cannot be the antichxist. Again its mouth indicated elo- HOMAN CATIiOLIC RELIGIOX. 239 qnence, was eloquent — Then my opponent is, himself, the beast, for his speech was truly eloquent. Indeed the ingenuity with which he dressed up even the old story of " she is fallen, the mighty Babylon, the great harlot, which corrupted the earth — Allelujah, Allelujah !" is proof positive that would, hy hi.f comntand of language, deceive, if possible, even the elect, into the belief, that he had succeeded, where so many had failed, in breaking the seal of the mysterious volume. He has clearly put the lion in a net, and not so much as a mouse durst approach, to gnaw a hole, to let him out. 6th. He is opposed to Catholics. For they have been wont to ap- ply the words of St. John, just before he speaks of the antichrist, to the Protestant sects, which, they conceive, are fast hastening into the arms of the Unitarians, who deny the divinity of Christ. ''They went out from us ; but they were not of us ; for if they had been of us, they would, no doubt, have remained with us, but that they may be manifest that they are not all of us." I have already said some- thing of the " monster," not merely " beast," but " monster," which my friend attempted, like Prometheus, to form and steal fire from heaven to animate, that he might call it " Apostolic Protestantism." This, in our estimation, may be found to possess, some, at least, of the characteristics of the Apocalyptic beast. But we should beg leave to baptize it " Polypos" or " Legion." We could very satisfac- torily shew that it has made war on the saints, and devoured them by thousands, not to say millions ; that a portion of the beast so detains, even now, when ligiit from heaven is breaking, millions of the saints, of those who for the Confession of Jesus Christ and for conscience take are reduced to a galling servitude, a poverty, and a degradation, far worse than the lot of the negro, of the southern rice-fields. My friend began by observing that symbolical language gives great scope for the imagination. It sets us adrift upon a sea of speculation. Is he ready to embark upon that sea 1 Are his sails trimmed 1 Is his compass ready ? If the sad experience, to which 1 have alluded, has not disinclined hitii to the voyage, I assure iiim that he will find it to eventuate like that of the three wise men of Gotham, wliom our illus- trious compatriot Washington Irving, sent to sea in a bowl. We may drifi with every wind, and current, through a thousand perils, on this wide ocean of iinaginalion. But, my friends, what has imagination to do with this fitiestiotil She is a very good slave, but a very bad mis- tress. CJive me full scope with your imagination and 1 can prove to you any thing and every thing, until wo all are like the novel and ro- mance writers of the present day — " /'« fmry ripe, in rrasim rotten.''^ Novels and romances are, confessedly, works of fiction. They are not expected to contain reason, and therefore they escape censure. But when men pretend to pass off their day-dreams for the oracles of Hea- ven, they should renieinher the law o(' Deuteronomy, xiv. 5, " l/iat the Priyphrl and forgrr if drnniis yhdll hr sliiin,''^ and if they fear not even the fate of the false seer, at least, they HJiould apprehend the lash of criticism and ridicule. I know in tliis goorthward as far as the shores of the Euxinc and the neighborhood of Constantinople. The invasion ofF.gypt took place in 63fl, and within the space of three years, the whole of that populous province was in possession of the infidels. Afexan- dria wa.s the last city which tiW; iind in somewhat more than a century after the expulsion of philosophy from Kiirope by a christian legislator, the schools o( Africa were closed in their turn by the arms of an unlettered Mnhomelnn. The success of the SHracens was not inconsiderably promoted by the religious dissenlions of their chriitian adversaries. A vast number of heretics who had been oppressed and stigmatised by edicts and councils were scattered over the surface of Asia; and these were contented to receive a foreign master, of whose prinriples they were still ignorant, in the place of a tyrant whose iiijii*tice they had experienced. Hut in I'.gypt, especially, the whole mass of the native popula- tion was iinl'ortunately involved in thi- Jacobite heresy ; and few nt that lime were found, except the reslrlent Greeks, who adhereil to the dortrihes of the church. The followers of Kiityches formej an iiiimeiliate alliance with the sol- diers of .Mahomet against n ('atholic prince; and they considered that there was nothing unnatural in that act, since they hoped to secure for tbomsclres, under a V 3r '212 DKBATK ON THK MHhointtan, the tolf ration which had l)'en refused by an orthodox |;oTei'nm«nt. We iliould remark, however, that this hope, the pretext of tlieir desertion, was with many the suggestion of their malice: that besides the recollection of wrongs, Mnd the desire to escape or revenge them, thej were intlanied as furiously as their persecutors hy tnat narrow sectarian spirit, which is commonly excited n)ost keenly whore the difl'erenres are most trilling; and which, while it exagge- rated the lines that separated them Irom their fellow christians, blinded them to the broad gulf which divided all alike from the infidel. From Kgvpt, the conquerors rushed along the northern shore of Africa; and though their progress in that direction was interrupted by the domestic ditsen- tions of the prophet's faiullv, even more than by the occasional vigor of the christians, they were in possession of Carthage before the end of the seventh century. Thence they proceeded westward, and after encountering some oppo- sition irom the native IVloors, little either from the Greek or Vandal masters of the country, they completed their conquests in the year 709. Hitherto the Mahometans had gained no footing in Europe; and it may seem sti-ange that the most western of its provinces should have been that which was first exposed to their occupation. But the vicinity of Spain to their latest con- quests, and the factious dissentions of its nobility, gave them an early opportu- nity to attempt the subjugation ot that coimtry. 'I'heir success was almost unu- sually rapid. In 711 they overthrew the Gothic monarchy by the victory of Xeiebjand the two following years were suflicient to secure their dominion over the greatest part of the peninsula. The waters of this torrent were destined to proceed still a little further. Ten years after the battle of Xcres, the Saracens crossed the Pyrenees and overran with little opposition the southwestern provinces of France — ' the vineyards of Gascony and the city Bourdeaux were possessed by the sovereign of Damas- cus and Samarcand; and the south of France, from tlie mouth of the Garonne to that of the Rhone, assumed the manners and religion of Arabia.' Still dissatisfied with those ample limits, or impatient of any limit, these children of the desert again marched forward into the centie of the kingdom. They were encamped between Tours and Poictiers, when Charles Martel, the mayor, or duke of the. Franks, encountered them. It is too much to assert that the fate of Christianity depended upon the result of the battle which followed; but if victory had de- clared for the Saracens, it would probably have secured to them in France the same extent, perhaps the same duration, of authority which they pos3es.sed in Spain. Next they wTjuld have carried the horrors of war and Islamism into Ger- luany or Britain; but tliere, other fields must have been fought, against nations of warriors as brave as the Franks, by an invader who was becoming less power- ful and even less enthusiastic, as he advanced farther from the head of his resour- ces and his faith." Waddingtoii's Church Hist, p'ge 135. New York tdit. 1835, This is the tyranny fronn which tlie pope has saved us, and for it civilization and religion owe him a debt which they will never be able to repay. My opponent ran a parallel between pagan and Catholic Rome. Docs he not know that tlie pagan religion borrowed many of its es- sential rites, and not a ff;w of its forms, from the indistinct knowl edge of a primary revelation made to Adam and to the patriarchs, and afterwards from the written law ? And might I not rim a more perfect parallel between the Catholic and the Jewish institutions, while the latter was divine ? The Catholics have a Pontifex Maxi- mus, or High Priest; so had the Jews. The Catholics have a church to guide the people ; the Jews had a synagogue for the same purpose. The Catholics have a famous temple, to whose doctrine and worship all must conform; so had the Jews. The Catholic pontiff enjoys some temporal power; so did the Jewish pontiff. The Catholic pontiff sprin- kles holy water on the people ; the Jewish pontiff sprinkled them with the blood of a heifer, that was slain. The Catholic says, when re- minded by the lustral water, emblematical of the blood of Christ, of the power and mercy which can cleanse the stains of the conscience, "Thou shalt sprinkle me, Lord, with hyssop, and I shall be cleans- ROMAN CATHOLIC BELIOION. 243 ed ; thou shaltwash me, and I shall be made whiter than snow." Da- vid also said, "Thou shalt sprinkle me, O Lord, with hyssop, and 1 Bhall be cleansed ; thou shalt wash me, and I shall be made whiter than snow." The Catholics have nuns; so had the Jews nuns, like the prophetess Ann, who for "/owr score and four years departed not from ike temple, by fastings and prayers during night and day .'' Luke, xi. 36, 37. It is thus that his parallel crumbles! Lalcinos is not the name of the Catholic church. The title that the pope assumes is " sr.rvtts servorum Dei,''^ servant of the servants of God. The name of Luther, Dioclesian, Julian, of the true God, himself, could be made to tally with the numbers GG6 — see Robinson's Calmet, p. 71. I could take letters out of the name of Alexander Campbell to mean the same thing. Mr. Campbell. — If you can, I will give up the argument. (A laugh). Bishop Plrcell. — What language must it be ? Hebrew, Syriac, Greek, Latin or English? No matter. E is in some languages — 300— L is 50. — Mr. Campbell. — You have not yet learned the numeral alphabet. Bishop Purcell. — I cannot make the sum right off, but have a little patience with me and I will pay you all. (A laugh. — The au- dience having composed themselves at the request of the Moderators, Bishop Purcell proceeded.) Thus, you see, my friends, the name of my friend helps us in this matter, for it is the name of a man, and the name of a beast, too, with a hunch on its back, when wc can find the lacking numerals to decipher him. He has made a certain admission, after having denied it all the week, that the apostles founded llie se« of Rome. This shows that the truth ivill prevail, and that my friend will laugh in his sleeve at you, if you believe all his fanciful and ro- mancing conjectures about the man if sin. Again — another contra- diction." If all that blood is to be shed, in the exarchate of Raven- na, we are here, in Ohio, and safe enough from the danger under our happy constitution. — Wc need have no fear of being cruslied binealh the fragments of that crazy and tottering chair, the nope is sitting in BO uneasily ; the very rumblings of the volcanic hills will die, and their last echoes be inaudible on this side of the Athmtir, and as the Apocalyptic magician has i)oinl<unlry anciently called L!itium,an ap- pellation also derived from the same monosyllabic Lat; and Latiiim is a province of tiiat part of F.iirope called Italy, which also derives its name from the same fUOno'iylLtble I/AT. Fie not startled, gentle readi r; iipocalyjitic maniacs can with equal I'arility read backwards or forwards; and Mr. Sliarn informs us, that, if we read Italy backwards, we shall have Vlali, in tin iiiidit ot which is the He- brew iiionosyllable LAT. JVaviget Antic^raiiil Were I to describe all the varieties o( the disease, thc'sc obsiTvations would swell to an uniiieasurable bulk. I shall tliirefure content myni'lf with noticing the prophetic, which is iierhaps the most prevalent, upccies. V^'llell the mind is seized with this mania, the re;^ion« of futurity are instantly opened to its sight: it can point out the date and nature of every event which is to happen; it can in- form US in what year popery, Muhaiiiiiicdism, and iiifuUlily are to perish; when and where antichrist u to Ije born, reign, ami dir; who is to reslorf the Holy Land to the Ji w»; and in what ) < iir the new Jerusalem is to descend (roni heaven. It is in rain that preceding prophets liavi' fre(|uently oiitlivi-d tlifir own jircdic- lions; tin- hitons of experience are heard with coiiteinpt : and eiii h luw seer is convinced of the truth of his own visirnis. Anions thoitr who hnvi- pnllireil Inte- Ir under thi< form of the disease, the most cliKtinguished are Mr. \Vliital(rr niiH Mr. Faber, both scholars of extin«ive rrudition, nnil botli cfninlly nniinnlrd •gainst the Church of Komr. 'I'hcy both ni;rri- that Liithrr i«thr nii;;rl with the everlasting gospel; and, if by his gospel they ineiin the •olifidinn doctrine alrea- dy Daticed, they have a chance to be right. It may justly be called everlasting; V 2 246 DEBATE ON TUB for it will probably find proselytes as long; as man shall dwell on the earth. Mr. Whilaker discovers that the two horns o( tlie beast arc the two monastic orders of the Dominicans and Franciscans. Why they should claim the preference be- fore their brethren, of greater anti(|uity, or more griural difl'usion, I know not; but it is certainly unfortunate that the beast has not four horns: then you, ye sons of Benedict and Loyola, might have had the honor of being seatecf on the remaining two. The »ame gentleman informs us that the Ottoman empire will soon fall, Rome be wrested from the pope, and the seat of the papacy be trans- ferred to Jerusalem. Mr. I'aber makes an c(|ual display of erudition; but the third angel, Mr. Whitaker's Zuingle, he has placed in a most uncomfortable situa- tion: he has bound him fast in the midst of the ocean, and transformed him into the insular church q/' England! Nor does he always agree with his rival in more important points. The two beasts he shews to be tne two contemporary Ro- man empires, temporal and spiritual, under the emperors and the popes: and gives his reatlcrs the pleasing intelligence, that both tlie Turk and the Pope will expire in the year 1868. Though he does not expect to witness this happy event himself, yet he has the goodness to promise a sight of it to many of the present generation: £i triOV XxK^Xi ^XVTIUiTKl, Hi XXI VXl. Unfortunately for these two prophets, each disputed the accuracy of the pre- dictions of his rival: an animated controversy tbilowcd; and the result has been a conviction in the minds of most of their readers, that each has completely suc- ceeded in demolishing the system of his adversary, and completely failed in estab- lishing his own. Thus have I attempted to describe the diflferent symptoms of this disease; but I hope I shall be excused from indicating the method of cure. When the mania has once obtained possession of the brain, I doubt whether three Anticyrae would be sutlicient to expel it. I would rather, like Dr. Trotter in his treatise on the nervous temperament, endeavor to correct that predisposition which natu- rally leads to it. I would advise the Protestant theologian to suspend, for a while at least, his assent to some of those doctrines, which education has taught him to revere as sacred. I would have him learn to doubt whether it be certain, that a long succession of bishops, through many centuries, can be that one individual described by St. Paul as the man of sin: or that the church, from which almost all other churches have received the knowledge of the gospel is, " the great mother of harlots," and the kingdom of Antichrist. I would recommend to him, if he must decipher the apocalyptic hieroglyphics, to attend to the solenm assev- eration of their author, which is frequently repeated both in the first and the last chapters, that his predictions were, even at the time in which he wrote, on the point of beino; fulfilled. In the destruction of Jerusalem, and the first period of the christian history, he may find enough to exercise his ingenuity, and may per- haps stumble on the only clue which can lead to the solution of the dilficuities contained in this mysterious volume. I am aware that what I ask, will not readily be granted to me. The doctrine that popery is the beast, the pope antichrist, and christian Rome the whore of Fsabylon, is, I know, an im|)ortant part of the new gospel preached by Luther and his associates: it forms, to use the words of a learned prelate,* "a primary pillar of the reformed faith." But when I con- sider the dangerous consecjuences of this doctrine, its deleterious eflecfs on the judgment of some among the most distinguished writers of the Protestant com- munion, the ridicule which it serves to throw on the inspired writings, and the handle which it gives to the sneers and contempt of the professed infidel, I in- dulge a well-founded hope that, for the sake of religion and humanity, it will meet with little support from the enlightened characters, who now preside in the established church. If it once formed a pillar of the reformation, I conceive it could only be a temporary support, which may now be removed without dan- ger to the fabric. To the pious fraud, from its utility, the first reformers might easily reconcile their consciences; at the present dav it may be rejected by their luccessors with some credit: it cannot be retained without disgrace. ♦ Watson's Theologirai Tracts, vol. v. p. 7. ROMAN CATUOLIC BELIOION. 247 Half-past 11 o'clock, A. M. Mr. Campbell rise? — The bishop has not given one but many and various proofs of the truth of an adage of some currency and authority. Napoleon in his flight from Moscow, musing on recent disasters, often uttered this ex- firession : " There is but one short step from the sublime to the ridicu- ous." I never before witnessed so illustrious a proof of the invin- cible force of the argument from prophecy. I looked at the gentle- man writhing under the accumulating evidence, amounting almost to demonstration, that I had asserted no defamation in my fourth propo- sition. Instead of meeting the subject with scripture and argument, like the scuttle fish, he darkens the waters that he may escape the eye and the hand of his pursuer. His effort at mystification is as ridiculous as it is imbecile. He invokes the assistance of some old lady to create a laugh ; but the audience has got tired laughing at his manoeuvres. The subject is two grave, and the audience loo deeply penetrated with the awful truth which they had just heard to be amus- ed by such levity. Failing so manifestly, in the attempt to disparage all use of the prophecies, he undertakes to explain. He is driven into Asia to the Koran, and to Mecca for the man of sin ! How have the weapons of war perished ! Facts are not found in the history of Mahomet or Mahometanism, to explain these prophecies : and conscious of this, his own courage fails, and a second time he resorts to ridicule. As Voltaire, Volney, and other wits, have fruitlessly attempted to laugh Christianity out of countenance, he endeavors to place the whole matter before you as idle and absurd. Could my rhetorical and ingen- ious opponent afford more unequivocal manifestations of confusion and dismay, than you have now witnessed 1 But, my friends, we are not to be laughed out of onr argument, that stands before us like the rock of Gibraltar. The waves that strike it, but foam out their imbecility, and are broken to pieces. He may, indeed, torture his ingenuity to escape from an argument, which he dare not, which he cannot meet ; but he will torture it in vain. The effort of my opponent has been as much to disparage prophecy itself, as any mode of inteqireting it. According to him, prophecy is no gift: On our principles, it is at least as useful and interesting as history. It is one of the kindest boons of heaven, thai we an- per- mitted sometimes to peep into tin: future, guided by the lamp of eier- nity. The whole Hible, is for the most part, history ami prophecy. It is almost all history, for prophecy is the history of the future. Cod never held the iniinau family in suspense respecting their vital inter- est-s. Their origin, duty, and destiny, tie has eiiualiy regarded in all his communicationK. Soon as our first parents had transgressed in Eden, he permitted not one sun to go down, till he appeared to them and revealed a portion of his purposes. In a single period he con- denses a miniaturfr viromise, that there is scarce a single page of the whole Uible without a proj)hecy inscribed upon it. Cer- 248 DEBATE ON THE tainly my opponent has forgotten this ! Has he not, according to his ability, been turning into ridicule prophecy itself, the Bible itself God's orood and perfect gift? But if prophecy be wholly unintelli- gible ; Why, I ask, should it constitute so large a portion of God's only book to man T But I will not farther debate this question. The gentleman himself would admit all this, on any other occasion. I did not intend, indeed, and I am sorry I proposed, an argument of this kind before such an assembly, limited as I am at present to an hour or two, at most to complete it. If my opponent would devote with me a day or two to this subject, I might even satisfy himself, not only that prophecy is a gift, an intelligent gift ; but that much of it pertains to the origin, progress, and catastrophe of that very hierar- chy, of which he is himself a member. There are two kinds of maps in schools ; one gives both the place and the name of it, the other (sometimes called a blank map,) gives the place without the name. The former represents history ; the lat- ter, prophecy. Prophecy is as coaect a map of the future, as histo- ry is of the past ; but it is not always quite so obvious. I have taught geography with these two sorts of maps.^ The pupil studied on that inscribed with the names of the places, and we examined him on the blank map. The study of fulfilled prophecy, with the history of the past, prepares us for the blank map, the outline of the future. On the blank map, we can learn the great outline of things — their rela- tive positions, distances and magnitudes. We may sometimes err, in fixing the proper name on every place : but we cannot greatly err, in forming a useful acquaintance with the whole ; especially, having a correct knowledge of what is past, or of certain portions of the past, which must ever be a key to the future. * Thus we can acquire a clear and satisfactory outline of the vast expanse of future time, although we may, sometimes, err in a date, or in the name of a particular place, person, or thing. But as my opponent has so perfectly failed to meet my argument; I shall have to give it to the public without much amplification or proof. I will, therefore, recapitulate, emphatically, a few of the grand land marks ; and 1. The two tyrannies mentioned in Daniel and John, arose out of the great sea, the Mediterranean ; or, from among the nations border- ing thereon, in a state of tumult. Does not Rome stand on these wa- ters ; and is not Italy almost surrounded by them 1 'J'he Tiber itself, inconsiderable as it is, is nevertheless, a part of this very sea. This beast came not from the deserts of Arabia ; nor from the Pacific, nor the Atlantic ; but from the Mediterranean. 2. The origin or commencement of these two despotisms, or of the symbolic beasts of Daniel and John, exactly synchronize. They were contemporaries : indeed, they are identical. They both rise at the same time and place. 3. They are co-existent, and continue the same time, 1260 years. 4. The types, in both pictures, or the grand incidents and charac- teristics, are the same. 5. Their latter end is the same. There is, indeed, no argument on this subject : it is as plain as history. My opponent will never debate it. Paul occupies the place of a commentator or interpretator, and without a figure explains the mystery of iniquity. He avers the im- possibility of the appearance of this monster, this papal hierarchy, so BOMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 249 long as pagan Romp, which then hindered a pope, should continue to hinder. All commentators understand, " he that lets," as referring to pagan Rome. We have already seen, that we could not find a pope before the time of Phocas the usurper, and Bonifice III. No politico- ecclesiastic communion of nations, under a ghostly monarchy, ever stood on earth before that day. Paul speaks of the temple of God, ns the residence of this mammoth antagonist power. It was not in a pure church he appeared, and, cer- tainly it was not among the pagan Arabs, that this man of idolatry (for such is the import of sin in this passage) showed his blasphemous face. I said not, that there was no church of God at Rome, before the pa- pacy. If there never had been a true church of God, at Rome; the papacy, or the man of sin, never could have been born tliere. For, be it ob- ser»red, emphatically, the man of sin is not a pagan, a Turk, a pro- fessed infidel ; but, an apostate Christian. Does not the pope of Rome, and none but the pope of Rome, fill up all the grand lineaments of this painting] He exalts himself above all tliat is called a god — a magistrate, a pagan god ; nay, above God himself: tor no false God, nor the only living and true God, proposed to forgive sins before they were committed ! His name is covered with blasphemy. There never stood on earth such a monster; look- ing like a lamb, and speaking like a dragon. I need not, however, repeat what has not been contradicted. .My argument is unanswered. I regret that it must go to the public, without being more fully tested. As to Lateinos, the gentleman may laugh at it ; but can he show state or empire, whose name like that of He Lattiie Basikia, will spell 666 T If he cannot, this alone ought to check his opposition. My opponent did me great honor, in giving me such a colleague as Sir Isaac Newton, to bear half the brunt of his indignation. Greater literary and ecclesiastic names, than that of this great philosopher, and brighter stars in universal knowledge, adorn those prophetic heavens, and conceiiirat*! their light upon this map, which I liave traced so hastily and imperfectly. What, if I should let the gentleman see a star of the first magnitude, or hear an archdeacon, in his own church, say a word on Babylon, and on the woman that sits on many waters ! " Who can tlurc s.-ifdy live, wlicre not only wirkrd things arc lawful, but*!! men arc roni|)<:llc(l \ty the »er\«ri st piiniahnients to Ixlitvr, H|)«nk, anil follow the most wickfrd an;i uw^wWy thin^<; and to enibnirr \.\\vm as th'inf;di(il rontiiiuct thuit: St. I'hilip iVrriiM tiled to t> II lii< jiriiitinl*, that they who dr»ire to projjrrM in thr way ol (Jod ulioiild tiiliiiiit tfiriim lv( « to • Itarnedeorf Mtor, whom th«-y ihuiild obry at God. [ It tliii Mrtliodiiiii M llr nlio thui actl will be ttmrr from Imvinf; to rrndrr Qri urcouiil of iny of hii ■rtiolii. A ConftMor niuit br lirlicvpfj, bcraufc God will not iudsr him to err. Nothing is (afer than to follow the will of oae'i dir«clor, aud uotliiag ii more daofcrout J252 DEBATE OX THE than to be directed by one's own iudgnient. [Is this Episcopal'.anisni?] " If," continues I-igoii, quoting from Gbssii, " a couiniandnunt bt doubtful, he who acts in obedience to his confesaor is excused iVoin sin, although in truth, what he does is sinful." [Is this Metliodisiu?] Quoting (lO'-u St. Dionysius, he has the I'ollowing: " If there be o doubt whether what one is about to do is against the coniniairdnient of God, we must obey the romniandment of our y)rt/a/e," (bishop, priest or confessor,) " because, although what we do be against God, nevertheless, on account of the virtue of obedience, we being subject to our prelates do not sin." [Is this Kpiscopalianism?] — Id. ib. " Let the confessor,' continues the saint, "strenuously insist upon the peni- tent's obeying him, and if he refuses to obey, let him be sharply rebuked, be deprived of communion, and let his obduracy be blunted as much as possible." — Id. ib. N. 16. [Time expired.] Twelve o'clock, M. Bishop Purcell rises — It was not heaven's holy oracles, but man's presumptuous freedom with the word of God, that I ridiculed. It was my friend who ex- posed the holy record to contempt; and afforded to infidels occasion for triumph and insult, by forcing upon it his own preposterous inter- pretations, and making it say wliat its divine Author never intended it to say. I tell him again, in the very words of that sacred book, that " no prophecy if scripture is of any private inlerprciulioit ,•" that these blind who are '• leaders if the blind,'' and that " both fall into the pit i" Matthew xv. 14. that, as Peter says, there are many things in the scrip- tuns which my friend says are so very plain, hard to he nnderstood, which the unlearned and uns'able icrest, as they do also the other scriptures to their own destruction .- 2d Peter, ch. iii. v. IG ; finally, that "as there were false prophets among the people, even so shall there be lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition, and deny the Lord who bought them, bringing on themselvrs swift destruction, and many shall follow thfir riotousncss, through whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of." Having exposed tlie scriptures, our le^.rncd friend gave us a smart lesson in geography and chronology, proving, at least, one point to my satisfaction, if not to his own, that we may err in a date, place, person, or thing, the which he veritably hath done in his sym- bolical dissertation. T may, but I will not, apply to him the figure of Isaiah, "he has broken the eggs of asps, and may cat them; he hath woven the ."spider's web, and may clothe himself with the filmy tex- ture." Isaiah lix. 5. The fragile egg and filmy texture are proper emblems of fickleness, inconstancy, and change of religion ; but in ours there is neither mutability nor "shadow of vicissitude." ISIy friend has taken us a fishing again; llic sea monster has dis- colored the waters, and like the w^olf and lamb in the fable, he cliarges upon me the troubling of the stream. There is no escape for tho gentleman, '' I absolve thti)riatt' rt fcrenoe to my ninarks on symbols. I'pon this remark, I will makr one amnnalioii. \\ hatevcr else he has been j)lcased to say, may pass for what it is worth, tax free. The gentleman asserts, that beasts of prey arc not always sym- bolical of tyrants. Had I asscrlrd that proposition, it would havn been in point to have made such a ninark : but iinfortunatcly for liim, that was not my proposition. It was, that wlim (iod depicts a tyran- ny, he selects sorne monster, or some savage wild beast to symbolizo it. Hut is that identical with—" beasts of prey in symbolic languago only represent tyrants V Or follows it from my proposition, that a lion orancafTlemust«/(('tf_y.iand uniformly represent a tyrant] — I went far- ther ancfsaid, that some savage wild beasts— some monster was (iod's image of a sec\il;ir or eeelesiastic despotism. 'I'his was my explanation. It"i^ true liiat a " lion," as well as a " lam!)" is api>lied to the Sa- vior. He is the " Lion of the tribe of .liidah :" but Daniel's lion bad wings, and rame from the sea. It was a monster. The Roman spirit, in othiT words, the savagr; spirit of pagan and papal Kome, has been imparted even to Prnlestant stales. In so much that England has for her symlxd, or national device, a tawny lion; and her sons have chosen iliejr own eagle, a ravenous bird of prey, for their device, that they may pounce u;.:!i their mother's lion and show themselves as full of war and stratagem and spoils, as the bar- 256 DEBATE O.N THE barous and uncivilized nations of the old pagan world. — Although I prefer the American Eagle to tlio British Lion, I would rather fight the battles of my king, under the device of a milk while dove, on an azure flag, as more consonant to the genius of the Reign of heaven. War, however, is wholly barbarous. Nations at war, are at best but partly civilized, and, therefore, they generally choose beasts of prey for their insignia. \Vhen we become more rational, more civilized, and more christian, we will find some other way of settling our na- tional disputes, than with the sword, and with the confused noise of the warrior, and garments baptized in blood. The gentleman asked, the other day, (and I know not whether in the crowd of curious and impertinent matters introduced, 1 paid any attention to it) — if God could make twelve men infallible, could he not make as many more infallible as he pleased; and continue them through all succeeding time ■?! Certainly he could, I answer: but there is no philosophy in this question. I might retort, could not God have made fourteen instead of seven primary planets ? and as many satellites as he pleased 1 And the same answer would equally suit both questions. We therefore answer by saying, that neither the system of nature, nor the system of religion needs them. The inspired twelve made a full revelation of christian truth. They taught the whole religion : We need nothing more. If a full and explicit development, is once made, and carefully preserved ; ten thousand apostles could not perfect the christian system, by adding a new idea. My friend gave me a challenge the other day : I think I have ac- cepted it : he now adds from some new source, or repeats, I know not which, " If the testimony of tradition be not infallible how can you know the Bible to be inspired ?" This, together with his repeated assertion that Protestants believe in the bible on the same testimony he offers for the succession of Peter, &c.; I reserved for my sixth pro- position, which, because of the advanced state of the discussion, as respects time, is likely to be crowded into a corner, I therefore beg permission to introduce it at this time. " Prop. V'I. JNotwilhstuiulinglitr pittensions to liave given us the Bible, and faith in it, neare pcii'cciiy indepencJeiit ol' hei- for our knowledge of that book, and its evidences of a duiii:: original. The Roman Catholic says, as the bishop has himself averred, " I believe in the Holy Catholic church :" but this phrase needs a general council to explain it. Does it mean, I believe Ihe Catholic church; or, I believe in the (.^atholic church 1 Do they confide in it for salva- tion, or only believe what it believes ; and because it believes it? It is ambiguous. The " fides carbonaria" is thus expressed : " I believe what the church believes; and the church believes what I believe ; and we both believt; the same thing." Or, as repeated the other day, the Roman Catholic believes the bible on the authority of the church, and the church on the authority of the bible ! But the Chris- tian is commanded and expected to be always ready to give a reason for the faith that is in him. God is reason; and every communica- tion from him is rational ; and as man is a reasonable being, lie must have good reasons to offer for his believing the christian religion. When you ask a Roman Catholic the reason of his faith, what does he answer? His father told him that the Roman Catholic was the true church. 'J'he same reason would justify any one for being a Jew, a Turk, or an infidel. He that is of the order of Ali or Omar, ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 257 has then, as good a reason to give for his faith in the Koran, as any Romanist has to give for his faith in the bible, if his answer to the question, ' why do you believe ?' is, Because my father, or the /iturque, or the church told me it teas so. I would, indeed, be gratified to learn from my opponent, Dr. Purcell, why he would not have had as good reason for believing in the Koran, as he has for being a Roman Ca- tholic, on the ground cf mere tradition, had he happened to have been born in Turkey ? There must be an examination of the testimony, and perception of its truth, on its own intrinsic excellence; or, a con- viction of its truth upon the evidence which it affords; else there is no reason in faith — it is mere credulity, or superstition. The first, and characteristic difference, between the Protestant and the Roman Catholic, is this: the former believes the scriptures first, and the church afterwards ; whereas, the latter believes the church first, and ihe scriptures afterwards. " But," says the bishop, "where does the Protestant get the bible to believe, but through the church T" And that first brings us to tlie proposition. If any person hand me a book, and I read it, and believe it, does my faith in it necessarily rest upon him who hands it to me 1 And, yet, this is the gigantic strength of ail that my opponent can say on this subject. It would be much more plausible, that the Protestants are indebted exclusively to the Roman Catholic church for the book, if Protestants believed all the Roman Catholic traditions, as well as the bible : hut, while we reject ihe apocrypha, and the tradiiions of popery, and receive the bible only, this fact will answer a thousand volumes of sophistry, in proof that our faith in the bible, rests not upon the author- ity of the church of Rome. The fact, that we reject her apocryphal bible and testament, with all other traditions of Roman Catholics, an- cient and modern, resting solely upon her authority, and that we re- tain the bible, (one version of which she has,) is incontestable proof, tliat we receive the bible on other authority than her traditions. Dis- pose of this fart who may, I affirm that my opponent never can ! This illustrious and indispu'.ai)lc f-'f'. places in bold relief the irrelevancy of his eflTort to show, that our faith in the bible, and his belief in Pe- ter's Roman diocese, or in his being bishop of Rome, rest upon the same authority. That I must believe a letter on the authority of him who carries it, or a book on the authority of him who puts it in my hand, is another of the assumptions of the chunh of encroiichmcnts, resting upon Peter's having been bishop of Rome. (•0(1 created both the sun and the human eye, and he has adapted them to each other. He created the human understamling and the bible, and adapted them to each otht.-r. The honest sluduni y did not make the bible. She is, in- deed, a witness for the bible, and the true church, somewhere elHf ex- isting than in her own cotnmunion : for, had it not heeii for her rivals, who, like Ar(»U8, have ever watched the sarrerl i( xl, how it would have been interpolated and corrupted, her editions of the priiniiivr fa- thers, and other books of which she was the sole or chief deimstory, abundantly declare. But, having fixed the dale, not merely of the first pope, but of ttu! granrl scbiHin whieh originated the Roman Catholic church, 1 hasten, with all despatch, to ulfjw that we have rupies of the w 2 33 2vVS nEUATi; o.\ thk bible more ancient than tlio grand schism, more ancient tlian the firHt jiopo : nay, that were written before tlie question ot" a supreme head nep^nn to be discussed ; and wiiicli copies, in the form of transcription, Iiave never l)een soiled by the fingers of a 'monk. I read but a few documents, as I have but little time for this Subject; but I read them from a source of biblical authority, which, on thesje points, has not been, and, I presume, will not be, dispiited ; " Home's Introduction: " Of the lew iiinatijcripts known to be t\tuiit, whidi contain the Greek Scrip- tures (tliat is, tlu' Old Testament, nccoi-ding tu the Septuagint version, and the New Testament) there are two wliirh ])re-emincntiy 'lemancl the attention of the Biblical stuilent lor their antifinity ami intrinsic value, yiz. The Alexandrian manuscript, which is prescrrcd in the iiritish nmseum, and the Vatican manuscript, deposited in the library of the \ atitan I'alace at Koine. I. TheCuDKX Al.KXANnRlNUS, or Alexandrian manuscripts, which is noted by the letter A in Wetstein's and Gricsbach's critical editions of the New Testa- ment, consists of four foTio volui'ncs; the three first contain the whole of the Old Testament, together with the Apocryphal books, and the Iburth comprises the New Testament, the (irsl epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, and the Apoc- ryphal psalms ascribed to Solomon. In ti)e New Testament there is wanting the beginning as lar as Matth. xxv. 6. = vj^yu,- ifx.Txi- likewise from John vi. 50. to viii. 52. and from the 2 Cor. iv. 13. to xii. 7. [This maniiscripl is now preserved in the IJritish museum, where it was deposited in 17.73. ft was sent as a present to king Charl.,s I. from Cyrillus Lucaris, a native of Crete, arid patriarch of Con- stantinople, by Sir Thomas IJowe, ambassador from Kngland to the Grand Seign- ior, in the year 1(J28. ('yrillus brought it with him from Alexandria, where, probably, it was written. In a schedule annexed to it, he gives this account; that it was written, as tradition informeil them, by Thecia, a noble Egyptian HlIv, about thirteen hundred years ago, a little after the council of Nice. He adds that the name of Thecia at the end of the book was erased; but that this was the case with otli< r books of the christians, alter Christianity w'as extin- guished in Kgvpt by the Mohammeilans: and that recent tradition records the fact of tiie laceration and < rasure of Theela's name. The proprietor of this manuscript, bel'ore it came into the hands of C) rilius Lucaris, had written an .\rabic sub- scription, expressing that this book was said to ha\e been written with the pen of Thecia the martyr." [Introduction to the critical study and knowledge of the Ilolv Scriptures, by Thomas Hart^vell Home. \ ol. II. pp. 66, 67. But, this is not the only «7>/e-papislical manuscript of the scripture, now extant. II. "TiiK CoDEX V'aticanus, No. 1209, which Wetstein and Grie.sbach have bot:i noted with the letter B, contests the palm of anliciuity with the Alex- andrian manuscript. No fac-simile of it has ever been published. The Roman edition of the Septnagint, printed in 1590, professes to exhibit the text of this manuscript; and in the prel'ace to that edition it is stated to have been written before the year 387, i. e. towards the close of the 4th century: Montfaucon and Blanchini refer it to the 5th or 6th century, and Du Pin to the 7th cen- tury. Prof* ssor Hug has endeavored to shew that it was written in the early part of the fourth century; but, from the omission of the Eusebian xuxKxi^ and Tirxoi, Bishop Marsh concludes with great [)robabilil_v, that it was written be- fore the close of the fifth century. The Vatican manuscript is written on parch- ment or vellum in uncial or capital letters, in three columns on each page, all of which are of the same size, except at the beginr.ing of a book, and without any divisions of chapters, verses, or words, but with accents and spirits. The shape of the letters, and color of the ink, prove that it was written tnroughout by one and the same careful copyist." Id. ib. p. 74. There are also versions olddr than the papacy, older than the Vul- gate, which is itself evidently oldef than the church of Rome. "Syria being visited at a very early period by the preachers of the christian faith, several translations of the sacred volume were made into the language of that country. The most celebrated of these is the Peschito or Literal {Versio ■Simplex,) as it is usually called, on account of its very close adherence to the Hebrew text, from which it was immediately made. The most extravagant as- icrtioni have been advanced concerning it* antiquity, some referring it to the boma:< catholic RELiciort. 259 t'lme of Solomon and Hiram, while others ascribe it to Asa, the priest of Saraa- ritaiis, and a third class, to the apostle Tliaddeus. This last tradition is receiv- ed by the Syrian churches; but a more recent date is ascribed to it b_v modern biblical philologers. Bishop Walton, Carp/cov, Lcusden, Bishop Louth, and Dr. Kennicotl, dx its date to the first centurv ; Bauer, and some other German critics, to the second or third century: Jahn fixes it at tlie latest, to the second century; De Rossi pronounces it to be very ancient, but does not specify any precise date. The most probable opinion is- that of Michaelis, who ascribes it to the close of tlie first or to tiic ca^li.r part of the second century, at which time the Syrian churches llourisiied most, and the christians at Kdessa had a teinplo for divine worship erected after tiie model of ihat at Jerusalem: and it is not to be supposed that they woull be witliout a version of the old Testament, the reading of which liad been introduced by the-apostles." Id. ib. pp. Ifi7, 1C8. " An important accession to biblical literature was made a few years since, by the late learned and excellent Dr. Bucliannon, to whose assiduous hibors the British church in India is most deeply indebted: and who, in his progress among the I.yna churches and Jews of India, discovered and obtained nume- rous ancient manuscripts of the scriptures, which are now deposited in the pub- lic library at Cambridge. One of thise, «liich was discovered in a remote Syri- an church near the mountains, is particularly valuable: it contains the old and new Testaments, engrossed with beautiful accuracy in the Eslransrcic (or old Svriac,) character, on strong vellum, in large folio, and having three colunms in a'page. The words of every book are numbered: and the volume iiluniinatcd, but not after the Kuropcan manner, the initial letters having no ornament. Though somewhat injured by time or neglect, the ink being in certain places obliterated, still the letters can, in general, be distinctly traced from the in)- prtss of the pen, or from the partial C9rosion of the ink. The Syrian churcii as- signs a high dale to this manuscript, which in the opinion of Mr. Veates, who has published a collation ol the Pentateuch, was written about the seventh century. In looking over this manuscript, Dr. Buihannan found the- very first ♦menIAN CATHOLIC EELIOIOX. 261 the criticism I have heard be correct, the bird lately stamped on the new American coin resembles a chicken, more than a bird of prey. It looks as if it were more to be preyed upon than preying, and more sinned ajainst than sinningr. Before I come to the very important point of the Bible, I must not forget to quote the testimony of the eloquent Southey, to shew what anii-Christs the popes were, and how they displayed their anti-christ- ian spirit, in the conversion of Old England. " '1 hat (jiegoiy, who was alterwards raised ta the popedom, and is distin- guished from succeeding- popes of the same name (one alone tucepted,) by the rank of saint, and from him, by the appellation of the Great, was one day led into the niarket-plare at Rome, with a great concourse of persons, to look at a large importation of foreign merchandise, which had just arrived. Among other articles, there were some boys exposed for sale lilce cattle. There was nothing remarkable in this, for it was the custom evtry where in that age, and had been so from time immemorial: but he was struck by the appearance of the boys, their 6ne clear skins, the beauty of their llaxen or golden hair, and their ingenuous countenances; so that he asked from what country they came; and when lie ivas told from the island of Britain, where the inhabitants in general were of that complexion and comeliness, he inquired if the people were chrit- tians, and sighed for compassion at hearing that they were in a state of Pagan darkness From that day the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons became a favorite object with Gregorj' Accordingly he despatched thither forty missionaries Irom a monastery, which he had founded at Rome When, therefore, Augustine (who was their chief) and his companions landed in the isle of Thanet, they came not as obscure men, unprotected and unaccred- ited ; but with recommendations from the kings of !•" ranee, and as messengers from a potentate, whose spiritual authority was acknowledged and obeyed throughout tiiat part of the world, to which the northern nations were accus- tomealo iDok as the seat of empire and superior civilization. They made their arrival known to Ethelberl, ami requested an audience. They approached in procession, bearing a silver crucifix, and a portrait of our Savior, upon a ban- ner adorned with gold, and chaunting the litany. The king welcomed them cour- teously, and ordered them to be seated: after which, Augustine stood up, and, through an interpreter, whom he had brought from France, delivered the pur- port of his mission, in a brief, but well ordered and impressive discourse. He was come to the king, and to that kingdom, h<' said, for their eternal good, a messenger of good tidings; ofl'ering to their acceptance perpetual happincu, here and hereafter, if they would accept his ^vords. The Creator and F{edeemer had opened the kingdom of heaven to the human race: for (lod no loved iho world that he had sent into it his only son, as that son himself tentificd, to be- come a man among the children of men, and sufler death upon the cros», in atonement for their sinl. That incarnate divinity had been made manifcHt by innumenible miracles. Cliribt had stilled the winds and wuv««, and walked upon the waters: he hud healed (liseasei, and restored the dead to life: finnllv, he had risen from the dead liinnelf, that we might rise again ihroUKh him, iiml hud ni- cendcd into heaven, that he might receive us then' in his g1i>ry; and he would come again to judge both tlie quirk and the dead. " 'I'hink not," he proceeded, "O most excellent king, that we are superstitious, because we have come from Rome into thy dominions, for the sake of the sidvation of llue and of thy peo- ple; we have clone this, being conslrain«(l liy great lov«': for that which ive de- liire, above nil the nom[)s aiirlili lights of this world, is to have our fel!i)W-cren- tiires partakers with ourselves in the kingdom of h< :i\en, A;i-." [Southey'" Hook of the Cliurrh. chiip. iii. p. Xi. etc. My frif-nd proposed a question, which In; thought difTicult, Why do I believe the bible 1 He paid my answer would be, because tho church believes it; and this, he sayw, in like I'etcr uivinp a rbararter to Paul, and Paul to I'cier. I reciprocate the qurHiion of the gentlo- man, and he says he believes in the church, becauM; he believes in iho bible. Thus the bible and church testify to each other in his theory, and the difiiculty i.s infnuteiy greater for u Prolcslanl, than for a Ca- a62 DEJLVTE ON THE tholic. In fact, for a Catholic tlio question is not susceptible of any difficulty, whatever. One word will shew that we are ripht. Which Was priori The bible or the church 1 Manifestly, the bible was the older. The apostles did not wait to have thousands of bibles copied, and to freight vessels with them, and sail as supercargoes of the hea- venly merchandise, to the distant nations of the earth. " /«i7//," says St. Paul, '' comes front hearing.'''' There were millions of converts to Christianity, whole nations were converted to the Savior, by preach- ins;, before the different books composing the present bible, were de- termined to be genuine Scripture and collected into one volume. This was not done before the beginning of the fourth century. The church was therefore prior to the bible : and if ihe bible had never been writ- ten, the gospel could have been preached and believed, as it was in the early ages, without its aid. How did the apostles make converts without the bible"? They addressed themselves to the reason of the unconverted nations. They convinced them, if necessary, of the ex- istence of God, by the spectacle of the divine wisdom and power, dis- played in t.he creation and preservation of the world. They appealed to the natural law, whose precepts were written by the finger of God, on tablets of flesh, the hearts of men, before they were engraven on stone, amidst the thunder and lightnings of Sinai. Thus did they find the great primary truths of natural religion, with regard to both doctrine and morals, inculcated by the contemplation of the visible wonders of creation and the testimony of the human heart. They next proceeded to convince their hearers of the unity of God, and the sinfulness and grossness of idolatry, of their having departed from the moral law, of the darkness in which sin had involved the human race, of our incompetency for our own cure, of the divine com- miseration of our misery, of the descent of .Tesus Christ, his doctrine, liis miracles, his charily, his establishment of his church, his sacra- ments and the various means of grace, his promises to be with his apostles. He and his Holy Spirit, for ever, his death, &c. The holiness of the apostles' lives, the cruel death with which they sealed the truth they had proclaimed, conciliated the belief and coinpleted the conversion of their hearers. '' I willinglfi,'" says Paschal, " helin-e the witnesses,,^ who let their throats be cut to attest tfie truth of what they (leclar£" TliC bible could not shed its blood to attest its divine oriffin. The ignorant, who are a large proportion of the human race, could not read it; the learned, and the pious, and the sincere, as every one knows, fourid it a task far above their strength, to distinguish genuine from spurious scripture. Before the invention of printing, men could iiot procure bibles : since the invention of printing, they read them to introduce a flood of new sects; so that there are now as many religions, almost, as there are different versions or different readers of the scriptures. If, on the contrary, there is anything clearly taught in the scriptures, it is the authority of the church, which, without aid from the bible, not all composed when the first apostles preached, had fully established her authority, and, independ. nfly of her miracles, proved, by the preter- natural success of her preaching, that God was indeed with her, as he had promised, teaching all nations, and perpetually suggesting to her all truth. Hence, we believe in the church first; and on the faith of the evidences which I have enumerated, we believe in the bible, which the church presents to us, vouching for its purity and authenticity. • R03LVX CATHOLIC RELIOIOX. 263 The bible obtained, sanctions the authority of the church, and confirms our faitii. Here, nil is consistent, and onr submission to the church is reasonable. The Protestant divines. Hooker and Chillingworth, allow that the bible cannot bear testimony to itself: even Luther was forced to acknowledge it. " We p.re obliged," says he, " to yield many things to the papists ; that with them is the word of God, that we re- reived from tlierh ; otherwise, we should have known nothing at all about it." (Comment on John, c. 16.) Hence the remarkable saying of St. Augustine : " I should not believe the gospel itself, if the Catholic church did not oblige me to do so." Will my friend inform me, why lie rejects an authentic work, of great excellence, written by iSt. Barnabas ; who is termed, in scripture, an apostle, and declared to be full of ihe holy Ghost, (Acts xiv. 24> xL 21 ;) and receives, as canonical, parts of the New Testament, which were not written by apostles at all, viz. the gospels of St. .Mark and St. Luke ? The original text of Moses, and the ancient prophets, was destroyed witli the tem- ple and city of Jerusalem, by the Assyrians under Nebuchadnezzar; and the authentic copies which replaced them, perished, in the persecution of Anliochns. How were these books restored? Paul wrote his E|)istle to the Romans, and entrusted it to the deaconess Pli(Hbe. His Epistle to the Ephesians, he confided to the disciple Tychicus. How tan we be sure ot these epistles, as they now stand in the 'J'estamentT "Was il not the corruption of the bible by Queen Elizabeth's bishops, that caused James L to iiave a new translation to be made 1 Hut, 1 should be endless, if I enumerated all the insurmounlahle difficulties, which a Protestant encounters at the very first step of his journey in quest of a religion. lie muxt turn Catkolic al the vert/ inihrl, nud tuhc ihe bt'blf, a« he ffc/n it, on nnlhiirili/, or remain an unbeliever all hi.t life. And he nntsl believe that atilhurili/ lo lir infallible, or he ean never be sure thai Ihe bible il i^ives him is divine. (Jalholics have faith by baptism, as Protestants have ; but the latter lose it when they adojit, on arriving at mature age, the Protestant princijile, that every man must find out his reIirndeii(-e, he would bestow iijion us that spirit of peace, which feels no other sentiment than charily, no oilier interest than that of Jesus Christ, no other \Visli but for your salvation." Had wc been born Maliommedans, we wonid, perlr.ips, live MahommedaiiH. Thank (Iod, we are iioL IJnt, this lioeK not re- quire us to throw away our laitb. It would be too lf>ng lo notice nil the genlleiiian says. I attend to the most important. Now, I will vrnturo to assert, that ihern is not a Protestant in this house, who can say, that he has foufid oul all the tenets which lie be- 264 DEBATE ON THB lieves, by readings the bible alone. He believes them, because his parents, and teachers, and minister, his catechism, taught them ; or a hundred other influences may have been brought to bear upon his mind and his affections, favorable to those peculiar tenets. It is not at all the case with Protestant children, any more than with Catholic chil- dren, that reason is the first to lead them to their belief. Let each one candidly examine his own heart, and ask himself if he was not as much educated in those doctrines which he now professes, as the Cath- olics were in theirs. How can he be sure, if he indeed possess an authentic copy of the scriptures, that he understands them 1 " The word of God," says the Protestant bishop, Walton, " does not consist in mere letters, whether written or printed, but in the sense of it; which no one can better in- terpret than the true church, to which Christ committed this same pledge." (Polyglot. Proleg. ch. v.) My opponent says, there was a copy of the scriptures found, which the fingers of a monk had never soiled. And how does he go about to establish this proposition ! He quoted Home. I will take up this very v.ork, and prove, while I admit that Home was a learned writer, that he fell into some very unlearned blunders. But how does Home say that my friend is right? He says, that this very manuscript was found in one of the twenty-two monasteries of Mount Athos ! ! Lo ! there was a monk at the bottom of it after all ! [Time expired.] Four o'clock, P. M. Mr. Campbell rises — My friends, there is any thing but order in our discussion — I mean logical order, as respects the duties of a respondent. Now, certain- ly, this will abundantly appear in the report of this debate. The gentleman has not once, as yet, replied to my speeches in regu- lar sequence ; but, after the interval of a night, a day, and sometimes two days, he responds to some point or argument: and then his re- ply consists either in accusing me of misunderstanding, or misstating wliat he has said ; or perhaps in denying my authorities, or by intro- ducing some extract, or tradition, or opinion, from some great Pro- testant, or some good Catholic, or some excogitation of his own. His last speech was a happy illustration of Ovid's " congpstaque ebHeni — Non bene junctarum discordia seniina rerum." [Metamor. lib. I. And, certainly, his mirthfulness and gravity were in unison with the dignity of his reply; and equally fallible as respects effect of any sort upon his audience. This rhetoric soon wears out. It is but an echo, a sound, a shadow ; the crisis calls for something more solid. But if it cannot be found, I must submit to interruption, and turn aside to notice the gleanings of his last and best reflections upon the prophecies. The gentleman has given us from his library some ridiculous puns upon the name of Mahomet. He does not, and under his hard desti- ny he cannot, always discriminate the precise point in debate. It is not about the name of an individual, such as Ludovicus, or Maho- met; but of a people — a community — a kingdom. His second mis- take is, that if it were a personal name, the number of the name of Mahomet as given in his example only makes 502. His name pro- perly written is equal to only 463. He ought also to have decipher- ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 265 ed, or his author, whether his name should be taken as il is written in Arabic or in Greeii. But whether he take it i:i Arabic or in Greek, it will not in Grecian numerals, and ccrtainl}' not in Arabic, equal 6G(j. So fails his effort at both reason and ridicule to dispone of this morning's arorument from prophecy. I again repeat, that on this point, as en every other, my argument appears unassailable. Yesterday my opponent was asked, where infallibility resided ; to- day he answers by asking, where shall we find the mind ? In the head, stomach, hands, feet, or where? This is not a parallel case. The question is, as usual, mistaken, or misapplied. It is, where is the mouth of infallibility 1 when I desire an infallible response, where shall I hear iti Where is the tongue of infallibility ? If the church possess infallibility and never decides a question by any organ — ne- ver can utter an answer, it is worth no more than a diamond in the depths of the Atlantic, The alpha and omega of the proofs offered by the bishop for the ex- istence of infallibility, which has been so often repeated, and which I promised sometime to notice', is this: '■'■ I am with you.''' Now, lo- gic asks, what means " I am with you V as proving infallibility, un- less " I am with you," is a phrase already incontrovertibly established to mean infallibility. But what says bible fact 1 There are, at least, four meanings of the phrase. 1 am with you, personally, providentially, gra- ciously, or with miraculous power. It could not be the first : for he was leaving them peiscnally. It could not be the second ; because that was common to all good men. 'J'hus God was with Josepli, with Jacob, with all the patriarchs, and with all good men. Il could not be that God was to be with them graciously ; for that too, is common to all christians. As the apostles said to all good christians, *' The Lord be with you all," it could not be a special promise to the apostles. What remains then] Mark, the evangelist, explains : "These signs shall follow. In my name shall they cast out devils: they siiall speak with new tont'ues, serpents shall they take away; and if they drink any deadly thirtg it shall not hurt thorn. They shall impose hands on the sick and they shall be whole." So the Rhemish 'I'esta- ment reads Mark's account of the promise, " I am with you." Again ; after the ascension of the Messiah, the evangelist relates, v. 20. " But they" (the apostles) "going forth preached every where: our Lord workini^ with all, and confirming the word with signs that followed." This, then, is the proof of infallibility, as interpreted by Mark in the canon Catholic Testament. Now, does rmt this confine the pro- mise to the apostles 1 Can the popes work miracles ! Can the bish- ops 1 — Such a miracle, f^-rsooth, as the existence of the I^oinan Ca- tholic church in the western empire, after the rise of Mahometanism in the east ! A splendid miracle, truly! 'I'hat proves as much for Mahometanism and I'agaiiism, is for the popes of I?ome : for all these systf^ms rose upon the ruin, and also withstood the shocks of other systrms I \\ hen Peter said to the rripide, "Silver and gold I have none; but such on I havr I give thee — In the name rtf .fcsus take up yonr lied and walk," he felt that he pes'*! ssed Homelliing in the promine " I am with you." (Tan any of his succeBsors speak in this style: silver and gold I have none: but such as I have (the power of Christ) I give thee ? The gentleman's dimerlation on the vicious circle, leaves him X 34 266 DEBATE 0>" THE where it found him ; believing the church first and the bible after- wards; and makinor the one prove the other: but he will never dis- pose of it. He is like the eccentric ■witness, whose veracity could only be ])roYe(l by the principal : and yet the principal depends for his veracity upon the witness. The bishop for a little while turned Protestant, and then he affirmed that he believed in Christ on the ev- idence of his own miracles ; and that evidence he found in the bible, and tjiat bible he interpreted for himself". Thus he became a Protest- ant, when he attempted to solve that (iordion knot. But as soon as he had, by the Protestant rule, obtained faith in Christ, he instantly relapsed into the embrace of holy mother, and denounced the bridge over which he escaped from the island. But the gentleman asked a question which has puzzled wise men to answer. A child however of four years old could have asked Newton a question that he could not have answered in a thousand years. "How can you prove the bible]" says the bishop. Does it prove itself 1 I will imitate him, this once, and ask, does nature prove it- self! Does God prove his own existence without his works or by his works] Must there be another universe created to prove this 1 — This is a question no one will put, unless on the hypothesis that no man can prove a universe to exist but by other testimony than itself. So the bible proves itself to be the word of God, as nature proves it- self to be the work of God. Thus has the supreme intelligence stamp- ed the impress of himself both on nature and revelation. David says, " Lord, thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name." I have other reasons, if necessary, to prove how the bible was put together. Many a christian has been made so by the single testimony of one evangelist ; or by a single epistle of Paul. We have four gospels; but one would have been enough ; and as much as many individuals had. The whole christian doctrine might be learned from Paul alone, from perhaps the half of his epistles. Paul and Peter wrote, and said niucli more by divine inspiration than is preserved or recorded. So did the ancient prophets. We need not lo prove, in order to our faith, who collected the writings into one volume, any more, than who col- lected all the words of Christ, that arc reported. Cardinal Bellarmine says: "There is sure to be some doctor at the head of a schism." Heresiarchs are generally men of letters. Where then the pertinency of those remarks about the unlearned wres- ting the scriptures? The original means untaught, untractahle persona rather than unlearned, Philosoj)hers, as they love to be called, are generally the most unteachable, and the greatest wresters and perver- ters of the scriptures, Peter had those too wise to learn, in his eye, when he spoke of wresting the scripture ; and not the simple, honest and unassuming laity. Let a man sit down as Mary sat, at the feet of Christ, and humble himself as a pupil ought; he will then hear the voice of God, and understand it too. He will then discern how it is, that all God's children are taught by God, and that there is none that teacheth like him, ■'- Rather wittily than logically, the gentleman gives the monks some credit, for handling the Alexandrine manuscript. Be it known howev- er, that monkery began in St, Anthony's time; and that this said copy is older than the founder of monasteries. Because Tacitus, Livy, Hor- accj and Virgil passed through their hands, are we dependent on them H01LA.N CATHOUC HELIGION. 267 for all our knowledge of Greek and Roman letters'? The monks handled copies that they never wrote. But that gave those copies neither more nor less credit. I did not mean that one ought not to thumb the scriptures in reading them, when I spoke of them being soiled by the hands of a monk. I have then, so far as objection has been made, as I con- conceive, sustained the sixth proposition. Will the president moderator please have the 5th proposition readl [The 5th prop, was here read.] Prop. V. Her notions ot" purgatory, indulgences, auricular confession, remis- sion of sins, transubitiiitiation, suoererogalion, Aic. essential elements of her sys- tem, are immoral in their tendency, and injuiious to the wcll-bciug of society, relis:iou5 and political. Now, my friends, I want to strike a blow at the main root of the whole papal superstition : for that root is found in the proposition just now read. I have but little time to do it, and shall, therefore, march right up to the point at once. The capital, distinguishing doctrine of Protestantism, next to the bible alone as the rule and measure of christian faith and manners, and the right and duty of all to read and examine it is, that the death of Jesus Christ was not simply that of a martyr : hut that " be died for our gins, according to the scripture-s." That the death or sacrifice of Christ is the great sin offeririg, and the only sin cffcrin!^, is a cardinal doctrine of Protestantism ; and that there is now no priest, nor vic- tim, nor sacrifice, nor altar, nor sin offering on earth follows, as a matter of course. Jesus was " the Lamb of God" — " Himself the sin offering and the priest." He expiated our sins in his own body on the cross." " His blood cleanses from all sin." Papal priests, penances, confessions, masses, remissions, purgatories, intercessions of saints, angels, and almost all their ceremonies, arise frcyn the notion, the radical mistake that the sacrifice of Christ, as a sin offering, an atone- ment, a reconciliation, was some way deficient. Although we can trace supererogation, purgatory, penances, lustrations, the intercessions of angels and dead rnen, &c. to the philosophers and drejiincrs of the east — their divine Platos, Pythagorases and Aristotles : still llio im- mediate origin and cause of all these errors may bo traced to ignorance of tlie bible doctrine of the priesthood of Christ, the antitype of that of Aaron and Melchisidec. It was Dryden, a Iloinan Catholic poet, if I mistake not, who said thai the dos pou .sin, which Ar.^hinicrlrs sought in vain by which to raise the globe, was found by the |)opes of liomu in the doctrine of purgatory. That uas tlu: philoBophor's stone — tho lever which lifts the world — which has brought more gold to Rome, than the discovery of America itself. My friends, the docUine of purgatory with ail its correlatcais based on two errors. Ist. Thai man ran do more than his duly .• 2d. That soinclhina; may be added to the sacrifice (f Christ lo qive it more value or rffirari/. Now, I affirm, that no created being, not a Gabriel, or Uriel, or Raph- ael, or the highest of the angelic hosts, can do an act of Kupercro- galion. No man can, by any thought, word, or action, make (Jod his debtor. " Who," nays Paul, " has first given to tho Lord, and it pliall bfl recompensed to him againl For, of him, and through him, and to him, are all things." Jesus told his disciples, that when they had done all that was commanded them, they had only dono their duty, and were to him unprofitable iorvanti. The greatctt saiot that 268 »EBATE Oy THE ever lived is not more holy liian he ought to be, on his own acconnt. This single thought evaporates that sea of merit which has performed such wonders in Roman story. No human being has any thing to give to God ; and therefore none can merit from him any thing. If a man's salvation depended on his shedding a single tear, where could he find it] The heart that feels and the tear that flows, clear as chrystal down the cheek of the most devoted saint, are of God's creation. And, therefore, it is out of the question, to conceive how any work of merit, as respects God, is pos- sible for angel or for man. Were a saint to turn pilgrim and peregrinate on his naked knees the four quarters of the globe, were he to give his body to the flames, when God asks it, or duty requires it; he has deserved nothing from God, on the ground of merit. He has only employed the powers that God gave him, and used his faculties in a way consonant to the de- signs of him that gave them. And sooner will a man add new glo- ries to the sun or create new luminaries in the heavens, than add one attribute of merit or of power to the sacrifice of Christ. " He fin- ished transgression : made an end of sin offerings, brought in an ever- lasting justification ;" and left nothing to be done to make his sacri- fice more meritorious or efficient. ^^ orks of supererogation, auricular confession, masses for sins, transubstantiation, purgatory, with all the appurtenances thereto be- longing, are the veriest ghosts of pagnnism — the j)hantoms of infatu- ated reason, attempts against the dignity cf God and the supremacy, as well as the true and proper divinity and dignity of his Son. This superstition, this man of sin, stands with his two feet upon the two greatest lies in human history. He places his right foot on the first and his left foot on the second. Need I say that the former affirms l/ial Iks sacrifice nf Gtidh oivn Hon is insffficienl as a sin cffer' ing .- and that the latter teaches thai man can do more than his duly to God. Here then, I say to my opponent, 1 will measure swords with him. Let him meet me on these too points, then it will be an easy task to dispose of his imaginary purgatories, transubstantiation, pen- ances, works of supererogation, &:c. 6cc. and to show that so far from bringing glory to God or righteousness to men, they are positively, naturally, and necessarily opposed to both. Let liim try his strength of scriptural argument and reason on these cardinal points, and it will, as our time is so far exhausted, save the tediousness of nume- rous details. — [Time expired.] Ilaf-pcsi 4 o'cIocA; P. M. BiSHf P PuRCKr.t. liiSf- — My friends, it is imperative upon me to make one exposition before I proceed. Many of you were here when my friend would have led you into a gross mistake, respecting the Catholic church, by quoting a pretended extract from Liguori. I asserted then, that nothing could be found in that writer's works to substantiate the odious charge, to give it so much as a semblance of truth. I have now before ine the entire w'orks of Liguori, and I have placed them in the presence of- my friend, Mr. Campbell. The 9th volume has an index, containing every word of any importance, and I repeat, that after a search through the whole nine volumes, nothing like th-: rjuolation cf last evening can be found. I have now placed the book in the hands of Professor EOMA?» CATHOtIC HELIClo:*. 2C9 Biggs, of Lane seminary, one of the moderators, and a Protestant of the Presbyterian dcnoniination, if I do iiot mistake, and I will leave it to him, or any other mtelliorent and candid man, to say to you wjicther the fact is as my friend has stated, or the very contrary of what he has stated. Mr. ("ampbell. Be so good as to explain the matter fully. Bishop Pl-rcell. I will explain the exact stale of the case. Mr. Smith, the author of the translation, from whom my friend read this, as well as many other things, has ffiven a fake quotation, and made Liguori say, what lie never said. The facts are these : a canon of the council of Trent, and Liguori, according to the canon, say, "that if a priest falls by criminal intercourse, as specified, from the holy state of purity, to which he is bound by a voluntary, deliberate, and solemn vow, he shall be deprived of a large portion of his salary for the first offence. If he does not rel'rain after admonition and such punisiiment, he is again admonislied, and deprived of his whole salary, and suspended from all his functions as a priest in the Catholic church. But after the third admonition, if he is still incorrigible, he is excom- municated, and cut otf from the church, even as St. Paul cut off the incestuous man of Corinth." 1st. Ep. Corinth, ch. 5. v. 5. Nowhere, in any pan of these volumes, is it said that a priest may sin thus upon paying a fine, &.c. Thus, my friends, you see how the poisonous fountains of error and prejudice have been swelling over the land, and infeclinfr the public mind, until many an honest and upright man has ihonirht, wlu-u he denounced us for our (imputed) doctrines, he wasdoinnr (iud a service. Were he aware of the imposition practised on his credulity, he would, I have no doubt, have turned his indignation on riiore deserviufr victims. "7/" we leave off slunderinu; them,''' said the ministers of Amsterdam, to Vossius, who remonstrated with them on their injustice to the (-a- tholics, *'■ our people idHI soon leave us.'" " JVes/tall do no !j;ood irith the people,'''' said Shaftesbury, speaking of the Mocedo plot, " //" we cannot make them swallow frreattr nonsense than this." " 'J'liou shall not bear false witness ofrainxl thy nii^hlior,''' is a commundnii-nt which Maria Monk and \\('j reverend y\iAv\:Ui\'^ reckon not to belong to the '* wciiihtier ihinjfH of the law ." 'I'lit-ir stair calumnies are pai,! lor w itl> the biood- mcni y ! (Jur doctrine-, many of its minisleiial adversarus kiunv to bo pure and holy; but, overwhelmed with confusion, whenever they at^ tcm|)t argument, iIk y have no res(.urc(! but in addressing themselves to llie pre|udicesol' their inijiliiit i)elievers. 'i"lie»e mock at (.'albolica for " heariiiff the cliurcli;" and wlioni do tin i/ bear 1 As to the bible, the whole dilHculty is to be gone («V(.'r nijain and again. Every now translation, it seerns, lies open to obJeclionH on grave and important rcasion to use in argumrmi, as proof that the celibacy of the clergy was earl^ introduced. This was a perversion of my observation, which the deli- cacy of my situation would not allow me to explain. Nor will I now Bin against my own feelings, or those of my audience, by going full^ into such details. I will only add, that I have a superfluity of evi- dence in proof of the allegation of Ligori. The casuistry, dissimula- tion, and immorality of the Jesuits, and the whole genius of the inter- nal spirit of the papacy, are abundantly attested in tho two works ly- ing before me: "The Provincial Lcllers," of tho accomplished Pa«- 3i 274 DEBATE O.-V THK chal, which I have not yet opened in this discussion; and, "Th«» Secreta Monita of the order of Jesus." This copy, in the original French, I am informed by the lady through whose kindness I have been furnished with it, was broutrht to this country by the secretary of the great and renowned La Fayette, on his last visit to the United States. This, our national benelactor, who, my opponent says, was a true Catholic, has declared, tiiat if our liberty should be lost, it will be by the hands of priests. I saw this fact stated in two papers; one pnbTishcd in Richmond, the other in New-York ; and I have no doubt of its correctness. The Secreta Monita has been a few years since, translated at Prin- ceton N. J. and is now found in many book-stores in thrs country. From the perusal of these two volumes, we shall find that the moral theoloed." [View of Ml Religions, coiiijiilid and selected from the best authorities by Thomas Tiohbins, minister of the gospel in east Windsor, Conn. Hartford 1826, p. 25. It is always right to attack a doctrine in the words of those who ROilAN CATHOLIC BELIGIO.f . 277 profess it. Every cardinal doctrine of the papacy can be traced to a certain period, when it became an element of the system. Monachism began to be taught by St. Anthony in the 4th century. Auricular confession in the 5ih ; but was finally established by In- nocent III. early in the 13tb century. Theoretical purgatory began to be spoken of from the Pagans and Jews in the 6th century; but did not obtain a fixed residence till in the council of Florence, it became an integral part of infallibility A. D. 1430. Farly in the 7th century the idea of universal father, or pope ob- tained. In the 8th centurj', after many and various fortunes, images bc^an to be set up ; and in the Olh became an integral part of Roman Catho- licism. In the year 730, a council summoned by Leo. III. with only one dissenting vote, called the worship of images and relics idolatry. Celibacy among the clergy began to be canonical in the 11th cen- tury. In the 9th century, the doctrine of transubstantiation began to be talked of commonly ; but was made iufiliible by pope Innocent III. 4th Lateran council. Scotus, of Roman Catholic memory, affirmed that it was not an article of faith before the Lateran council of 1215, and that it cannot be proved from scripture. Bellarminc, Book iii. chap. 23, on the Eu- charist, quotes Scotus as saying so, and admits, " thougli the scrip- tures (lisol)edii iit to the civil niagistrates. What tumults and seditions mark tluir eonduetl For what trilles do they (ly to arms I St. Paul commanded the first christians to shun llie si'Ciety of the wicked ; and l)ehold ! tlie reformers seek most the snriely of the most corrupted. These are their deliglit. The gospel now flourish- es forsootli ! bfcause priests and monks take wives in opi)f.sition lo human laws and despite of their sacred vows. Own it is tidiv to ix- change evils for evils, and niadnesH to exchange Huiail evils (or great ones." Ep. 47. Lib. .31. John Wesley sayH, speaking of bis own lime not one hundred and fifty years ago, ^^ .1 dimtipnlnl a^r (such as i« the present perhaps beyond all (hat ever were, at ieasl that arn recorded in history) is an a^e wherein (iod is generally forgotten. And n dimijuiird tinlinn, (such an England is at present, in n superla- tive degree) is a nation, a vaht majority of which has not God 'in all their thoughts.' Wc therefore speak an unfjucstionablo truth, when 284 DEnATE ON THE we say, there is not on the face of the earth another nation (at least that we have ever heard of) so perfeetly (Ussipalcd and uns^odly ,- not only so totally without God in the work!, hut so openly setting him at defiance. There never was an age, that we read of in history, since Julius Csesar, since Noah, since Adnni, wherein dissipation or un- godliness did so generally prevail, both among high and low, rich and poor." Neither would it be well in a Protestant, in order tn apologise for the disorders, which I have mentioned, to sny — '-that they were only the accidental evils of a moment, evils of a period of change and fermentation." What ! the first fruits of a reformation disorder ! — the first fruits of a system of piety licentiousness! — the first fruits of the rcestablishment of the law of truth, impiety ! Surely such an apology, and yet it is often made, is absolutely weak ! There are multi- plied attestations of it. "• Miserable,'''' says Neal, speaking of the time of Elizabeth, and when the fermentations of the revolutionary vio- lence of the reformation had subsided, '■'■miserable and heal henish was the condition nf the country in regard to religion.'''' That you may form some notion of their condition, hear in what manner the inhabi- tants of London, in a petition presented to the parliament during this reign, express themselves. " In one half our churches," they say,"" we have watchmen that have no eyes ; and clouds that have no water ; and in the other half, there is scarcely one tenth man that takes con- science to wait on his charge. Whereby, the Lord's day is often to- tally neglected ; ignorance increaseth, and wickedness comcth upon us like an armed man." "In the couuty of Cornwall," Neal says, "there were at this period a hundred and forty clergymen, not one of whom could preach a sermon." The situation of other counties was nearly similar. .Judge of the conse(|ucnces. I liave here the autiien- tic documents, Luther's and Wesley's works, to ])rove what 1 have cited. Here is the great father of the reformation ; with Melaucthon at his side, both very unghoslly looking p(!rsonages, on their lenecs, be fore an image of the crucifix !! (Holds up a large and old volume, and describes a circle, with his person, exhibiting the pictured title page, -nt ■which there was continued laughter.) 'I'his edition was published by Lawrence Schenck at Witiemberg, in 15ol. Here is image worship by Martin Luther and his co-reformer ! and beasts, and monsters all around them. Mr. C. says that the popes might have been much worse men than he has described them. Tlint bad acts are soon for* gotten, and good ones more apt to be ebroniflod. 'I'his is, unfortu- nately, not the case, as history but too well attests. 'J'iie virtues are too unobtrusive to attract public notice, and Shakspeare, who was a close observer of human nature, says : If I can quote him correctly ; "Tlie ernaum in their synagogue, on the occasion of our Lord having fed five thousand men in the desert, upon a few loaves and fishes. And as at the well f)f Jac'li ho spoke of the loater nf life ; sy hero, when the mirarle of loaves is the topic, he speaks of the hread if lift- .■ and of ealin'j; th.it bread, as to tlu; wo- man of Samaria, he spoke of drinhlnp; that water. Mc goes on to apeak fig\iratively oi cominiiio him, enlint^Wnw, niwrhuni^rn'm^, never thirsting again, fee., and in tlie most figurative style, continues his discourse, till at l;ist, after he had s|)okeii of tlnir eating )ii.-< flesii and drinking his blood, he told them that the words he spoke " were snirit and ///■'•"" not literal fle/Jt and hlond — that flesh and blood could not profit the soul. An(l so the apontle I'eter nnderstood him when ho said, " Lord thou hast the words of eternal life." In metaphori- cal language, it is usual t(j say ' one /itinf^rm and l/tirxln afl(.'r knowl- edge, righteousness,' &c. ; and to say that one cats what he hi-lieves and receives into his mind. Thus says David : "I found thy woj-d, and I ^id eal it." The transubstantiation of John vi. is the very op- posite of the transubstantiation btfore uh. It was flish into bread, M the figure given in John; and bread into flesli, as the figure fiven in the Eiichai-iKt. "I am the living bread." " My fl'sb is meal, in ing, theft, perjury, the utmost umlcuiiness, murder, and all sinsl Their doctrines root nut all sentiments of huiuunity: excite rebellion: root out all religion: and mbstilule all sorts of superstition, blasphe- my, irreligion, idolatry." Other reasons for the suppression of this order, will be found in the following extract from their oath : '• In ihe presence of Almiglily (lod and of ul! the snint», to you. n>y ghostly father, I do declare that his lioline»», pope , is Christ's vicar-generni, and the only liead of the universal church throughout the curlh: and that by virtue of the keys given him by my Savior, Jesus Clirisl, he hath power to depose heretical king-., princes, states, conunonwealllii'. and govern- ments: all being illegal, without his sacred ronfirmntioii; and that thry may »afely be IAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 295 ing of it, of swearing for ever to interpret it as it has been interpreted, of not permitting men to think or speak for themselves on religion, of teaching them the power of the priests to work miracles, to create a god out of bread, that the people might adore it and them, of making a supreme judge of controversy out of one of the parties, or combining the legislative, executive, and judicial powers in one person, (the model of the most cruel despotism,) is the paragon of supreme tyranny, never surpassed, never equaled on earth. How any person can, from such a system, elaborate a single ele- ment of free government, or of civil liberty, I cannot imagine. Indeed, the radical ideas of papal supremacy, are as antipodal to republican doctrine and American institutions, as are the zenith and the nadir! But my time has fled. TSvehe o'clock, M. BfSHOP PURCEU, rises — t have only to stand here for half a minute, and to open the bible, to reduce to dust the arguments which it costs my opponent such a waste of time and labor to construct. Was not Civil and Ecclesiastical power united in the high priest, by the Almighty God, himself 1 Is not this re- corded in Deuteronomy, and admitted by my worthy antagonist 1 What says the scripture. " If you perceive, that there be among you, a hani and ilouhtl'ul ninltfr in judgment, between blood ami blood, cause and cause, leprosy and leprosy; and thou sec that the words of judgment within the gates, do vary ; arise and go up to the place which the Lonithy God shall choose. And tliou thaltcoiue to the priests of ihe Levilical race, and to the judge that sliull be at thai time; and thou shall ask of them, and they chall shew thee the truth of the judgment. And thou shall do whatsoever they shall say, that preside in the place, which th« Lord shall choose, and what they shall teach thee accordms to this law: and thou shalt follow their sentence, neither shall thou dechne to the right hand nor to the left hand. Bui he that will be proud, and refuse to obey the conmiand- nient of the priest, who ministereth at that time to the Lord f Jod, ami the decree of the judge, that man shall die, ami thou shalt take away the evil from I^rnrl." — Deut. xvii. 8, et seq. Here is civil power, and ecclesiastical authority blended m one tribunal, of the presiding priest and of the I.evilical ministry, and the penalty of death ordained by (Jod, against him who contends for private judfriient and refuses to obey. Now, my friends, if Mr. ('. seriously intends ti employ reason and argument, instead of the calumny and abuse too often employed in re- ligious discussions heretofore, why does he rake up from a pile of rubbish, sad memorial of the havoc made by llie enemies of the Je- suits, and exhibit the tattered, and sordid, iloniments found there, lor proof? I expected "■ honor hrt^/it" from my friend, when we beg;in this debate, and I still expect it. Have I not dealt fairly myselH Have I gone to the sewers and streets, as he has done to lho«eof(*rncow and Paris for the Simlo .Voni7«, for evidence a[r,iinst the ProteRtantN t No! I have (|uoted their most respectable iiiitlifiritieK— I have taken up iSouthey, and Waddingion, and such writers. I do not think it honor- able to stoop down, and pick up from the gutter, all the vile trash, that Protestant.H have written against one another ; much less that, which the enemies of Protestants may have invented; and I do not expect this course frr-in my frieml. in his attempt to f;isten upon Catholics, the sins which they abhor. " Why did the p:.rlianient of Paris destroy tho society of the Jesuits V I will tell the gentleman. Because ihejr 296 DEBATE ON THE had become the disciples of the man, who boasted that " he was tired of hearing it said, that twehc men had been able to convert the world from paganism to Christianity, for that he would let it be seen that one man was able to unchristianize it." This was the boast of Voltaire, who, at the head of his letters to the infidel conspirators leagued with him against revelation, was accustomed to write the words ; '■^ Ecrasons Fin- fame,^^ Lei ns crush ike wreich, meaning Jesus Christ and his holy re- ligion. These anti-christian machinations could never succeed, and their authors were too wide awake in their hostility to the christian faith, not to be aware of the fact, as long as religion commanded the services of so learned and exemplary a body of men as the Jesuits. In all the entire world, in China and in France, in America and in Europe, society, as well as pure religion was their debtor. In every language they wrote the most admirable treatises on the mathematics, on medicine, on geography. Their historians, orators, poets, mission- aries, have never been surpassed. Mr. Secretary Cass and Richard Peters of Philadelphia, recorder of the Supreme Court, will inform you, for they have examined it, how perfectly accurate is their map of Lake Superior with its 1500 miles of coast, which one or two of these fathers, while seeking the red man, for Jesus Christ, in their frail canoe, found time to survey. In a word the Jesuits were ornaments to human nature, but they had, at the same time, the mi'aforiune to be the ornaments and the pillars of Religion. This Voltaire knew. His infidel colleagues knew it. And as they were conscious that the lives of the Jesuits defied their malice, and the learning of the Jesuits would continue to confound their sophistry, they had no resource but to op- press them by calumny. Hence they spared no pains to render them ob- noxious to the Parliament of Paris, and reproduced the Sccreia Moniia, fabricated by some anonymous calumniator in 1G12. The sp.urionsness of this paper has been every where admitted by the critics. Let not any one who reads this controversy on the theatre of its exposure, learn from it that erudition and honor are at so low an ebb in the United States, as to admit as argument, an appeal to so contemptible a slander. As to the oath of the Jesuits, it is taken from the same book ! There is no Jesuit that ever takes such an oath. Every Jesuit in the United States, who is not a native of the country, and intends to reside in it, has taken the oath of allegiance to our government. And in George- town, in the District of Columbia, in Virginia, Maryland, Kentucky, are native American Jesuits, some of the most whole-souled and tho- rough-going republicans in the world, prepared, at any moment, to imi tate the patriotic example of the first of their order in the United States, Arch-bishop Carroll, the friend and associate of Washington. In this spirit they are rivaled by the rest of our clergy. That venerable old priest, now before you, has done for half a century, and specially in those perilous times that tried men's souls, when a formidable ene- my was on our frontier, within our borders — nay in our very capital^ and committing our nob. est monuments to the flames, more for freedom, happiness and the union, than any other living man, perhaps, of ihe clerical profession. The Latin poems, which he published during the war, breathing the energy and spirit of the songs of the Greeks, when they struck down the tyrants, were translated into English, and widely circulated. General Harrison, if he were here to-day, would inform you, as he has informed me, by my fire-side, what loyal men ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 297 and true were the Catholic missionaries of Indiana and Missouri, in auld long syne. How they exerted all their influence, and it was not inconsiderable, to keep the Indians faithful to the cause of free govern- ment. My friends, if 1 must have an opponent, let me have an honorable one: let me have facts and proofs, instead of slanders and insinuations. ' And, to say all in one word, in answer to the charges against the Jesuits, Why did the parliament of Paris restore the order in Francel Ay, that is the question. 1 will tell the gentleman. Because they discovered their blunder, and the injustice they had committed in sup- pressing them, and the prostrate state of education, after the .Tesuits had been expelled the colleges. Then, with the magnanimity of the corporation of London, a few years ago, who honorably chipped oflF the inscription from the pillar, which, like a tall bully, raised its head and lied, by attributing tlie conflagration of 16Gt> to the Roman Catho- lics, did the parliament of Paris make partial atonement for the wrong done to the Jesuits. These are examples worthy of our imitation in a free and happy republic, where the iron heel of religious bigots should not be allowed to bend so much as a blade of grass ! I continue my argument for the real presence. I shall first produce the sequel of the scripture evidence, and then reply to the objections of my friend. The institution of the eucliarist is related by three evangelists, and by St. Paul ; by St. Matthew, who wrote his gospel, in India, seven years after the death of Christ; by St. Mark, who wrote his gospel in Rome, two years later, under the direction of St. Peter; by St. Luke, whose gospel was written in the nineteenth year of the Christian era, in Asia; and by St, Paul, from Macedonia, in Greece, fifty years later than St. Matthew, and who had learned what he teaches, not from the other evangelists, but from the revelations made to himself by Jesus Christ in person ; all writing at diff'erent times, and in difl^erent places, and yet all using the self-same words, the plainest in the languages in which they wrote, or in any other, and the best adapted to the poor and illiterate, who had the gospel preached to them. All tlicso tell us, with one accord, in the Holy Ghost, tiiat the Lord, the night before he suffered, took bread into his venerable and creating hands ; at)d lifting up his eyes to heaven, (to heaven, to show us whence that power was derived, that goodness emanated,) he blessed and brake, and gave it to his disciples, tn whom he had made the prfiinise of his body, saying: "Take, and eat. This t« my body." In like; manner, the chalice, saying: "Drink you all of this. This is my blood of the New Testament." Now, these words are so intelligible, and so clear, that if ever the prinriple, that every one can interpret the bible for himsi-lf, Khould be admitted, and enforfed, anri insisted on. it is surely hf-re ; for there is Hrarcly a possibility thai words so plain, and so frequently repealed in their plainness, should lead us into er:v)r. We may even safely ask, in tho nypothesis that Jesus ('brist bad really wished tr) leave iis his body and blood in ihf eufharist, what other words he could have unit], to signify more rlearly tlw r'al prcsincf in the sacranu-nl ? Ilr has, however, in his incdtnprebmHiblo wisdom and love, found HoMielhiiig plainer still; for he not only said, "This is my body," but, a." .18 298 DEBATK 0\ THE Was it a figurative body, that was deliverod for us 1 Was it by figtl-» rativr blood, that wo wore rcdeemod 1 Then are we yet in our sins, and Jpsus Christ has deceived ns. Tliis it were, in tlie last defrree, impious to suppose; and, therefore, steadfast in the truth of what the Son of God has done lor us, we may say, as Tertullian said, on a different occasion, to the innovators of his time : Under what pretence do you come'? and why do you remove the landmarks. The estate is ours: we have tlie ancient, tlie prior possession of it: we are the heirs of .lesus Christ : he made his will in our favor; and, eternal praise be fjiven to him, he himself, the oritrinal proprietor, has deliv- ered to ns the title deeds (layiiig our hands on the bible.) Here ia the pillar, the fast anchor of our faith in the eucharist. But it is not yet expedient to lay aside these texts, without conferring on them one mark of attention more. In the twenty-second chapter of St. Luke, . 18th, 19th, and 20th verses, we read of the institution of the eucharist, as a sacrament, and as a sacrifice, in a manner more and more expli- cit. "This," says the benefactor of the world, takintr leave of it, " this is my body, which is given for you ;" and in the Greek text of the Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, " which is broken for you:" " this is the chalice, the New Testament in my blood, which shall ba shed for you ;" and in the Greek text, " which is shed for you, for the remission of sins : do this in commemoration of me." Here, then, is every thing essential to a true sacrifice, clearly prescribed. The bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of Jesus Christ, and offered, and ordered to be offered to his heavenly Father, for the remission of sins. Now, hear how St. Paul, whose authority, upon what I have already remarked of the circumstances in which he was called to the apostleship, is entitled to special respect, speaks on this subject, in liis Epistle to the Corinthians: " Wherefore," says he, " my dearly beloved, I speak to you as to wise men ; judge ye your- selves what I say. The chalice of benediction which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ ! And the bread which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord? Behold Israel according to the flesh: are not they who eat of the (Pagan) sacrifices, partakers of the altar? But the things which the heathens sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God. And I would not that you should be made partakers with devils. You cannot drink of the chalice of the Lord, and the chalice of devils : you cannot be par- lakers of the table of the Lord, and the table of devils." Who doea not see, in a text so plain, that St. Paul contrasts the table of Christ with the altar of the Jews, and the table of devils, which the Gentiles frequented. So that, in the same manner as the Jews partook of what was offered on the altar, and the Gentiles of what was placed on the table af- ter having been first sacrificed to the idols, so do the Christians par- take of the table of the Lord, eating of that flesh which had been offered for them, and with whose blood they had been sprinkled and purified. But this argument would be weak and utterly inconclusive, if the faithful, like the Jews and the Heathens, were not partakers of some- thing really offered by them in sacrifice. Again, St. Paul, not only here, but also in the Ep. to the Hebrews, speaks of an altar, " of an altar, whereof they have no power to eat who serve the Tabernacle." Now it is altogether an abuse of terms, a wilful leading of others into error, to call that an altar on which sacrifice is never offered; and when St. Paul said we have an altar, whereof they cannot eat, who E05r.VN CATHOLIC HELIGION. 299 remain attached to the Jewish relijrion, he meant, no doubt what was then understood by every one, that there was a victim offered by christians at that day, 36 years after Christ, and eaten by priest and people. This is the victim of the eucharist, of which Matthew, Mark, Luke and Paul speak so clearly, and so forcibly, and which we must either now admit on the evidence of scripture, or Hing the Bacred volume into the flames. My opponent may talk of (^hrist's saying ; " I am the vine ;" " 1 am the door ;" " destroy the temple ;" the ten lean kine, and the ten years of famine ; but, my friends, does not the scripture explain its mt^aning, so as to leave no doubt as to the sense of these, and twenty such texts besides. The dream of Pharaoh, and his butler's were most minutely interpreted and perfectly ex- plained. The evangelist expressly informs us, Christ spoke of the temple of his body ; lest this expression should leave any doubt on the mind of the reader as to the Savior's meaning. But where is the parity between these passages and the words of Christ : "this is my body — this is my blood." " My flesh is meat indeed — my blood is drink indeed." Our Lord does not say of the vine, " tliis vine shall be hung up for you," he does not say of the door, this door shall be hung up for you, he does not say of the temple, or of the vine, " they shall be offered for you ;" but he says all this as I shall shew, when I come to speak of the institution when speaking of the divine food which he gives us in the Eucharist. "This is my body nhich is offered for you, this is my blood, which is shed for you" — and as he was then at the last hour of his life, and speaking heart to heart to his friends, it was no time for parables and figures. The traitor was nigh ; the hour was at Irand, wlun Iw was to ])ass out of this world to the Father. He knew how this doctrine would be contested, that the vast majoritv of christians would believe in it, as tiioy do at this day, according to the obvious and literal meaning of the text, and yet bespeaks not one word to induce us to believf in a figurative pre- sence. Why 1 Because he meant it to be understood liicr:iliy, with faitli in his almighty power and his infinite love. Hccausc as (Jod, he operates his greatest wonders, by the simi)lest words. " 1^1 there be lif^hl ;" " Thy son liveth ," " jMztirit.i, come forth ," " / i/'i7/, be thou cleansed.''' " 'J'ide up thy bed and wnl/c,'' •■' /'face .' Be still t" " 7Vj/« day shalt thou be with me in Paradise ," " 7'//;.i is my body, this is my blood/'' This I.utiier himself was forced to admit, lie tells ns how very desirous he was, and how much he laliored to over- throw this doctrine, knowiiig how miieh he could, thereliy, annoy ilus pope: 'but,' nays he, ' I found myself caught, without any way of escaping; for the text of the gos|)el, was too plain for me." Kpist. ad Argintenses, t. 4. fol. fidii. Kd. Wiltemherg. In another place, he says, condemning those who denied the corporal presence; "The devil seems to havt vnu; take the oath which 1 read to you ? — He would represent me as jucking out of the streets, or out of the ruins of some fallen edifice the oaths and books of the Jesuits. If that were the fact, would it disprove the con- tents of these documents? It would not. Truth is triilli, whercjver found, in the street or in a temple — in a cellar, or in a mnunlain. Hut I did not 80 seek or find them. They are public and authi'utic documents, and my opponentran only deny or dispute, but he carmot disprove them. Here is another document, not from the ashi'S of a monastery. I do not know the writer of iliis arliile : but it is from an Kncycloptcdia. BiHiioi' Pi KcKi.i,. Is it the book of Fessenden A:. Co. 1 Mr. C'ampbkli,. It is from their press. Bishop Purcki.i.. Ah ! I know it! Mr. Campbell reads: " In 1801 llie »ocirty wan rfitortd in Itnnnin l>v thr niiiwror I'niil : nml in IflOl by ItMiK I'lTtiiiiiind, in Surdiiiiii. In An^uit, JhM, ii hull w;!* i»«n|)r Piui vll. futorin^ llic onlcr to all tlKir fornn r |irivilfjj< », iiml i iilliii(j n|ii>n nil Catholics to nflToriltlirni prolrction nml ••iKciuriifjtnirnt. Tliii n( ( of ihrir rr- vival ii Pipr«'*^r(l in nil the nolrninily of the pnpnl imllioiity; nnil rvi-n nffinnrd to be nbnvi' thr ncnll or ri-vinion rifimy jntlnr. willi wIiiiIimt poMfT he niny \»' clothed; but to «• very «'nliiclitrm(iit, and those .Scfitch fanaticH in New ^'(l^k, who volunteer to teaeb Annrieans how to uiidirHlanulliiig ofl" an apple against the law of (iofi, is an offence that justifies the (Gover- nor of the Universe for having suflcred the whole creation on our 310 DEBATE ON THE planet to groan and travail together in pain and death for thousands of years. To the unpropilious destiny of my opponent I attribute all his re- marks on my saying ihat 1 read no tracts in confutation of transub- slaniiation. Does that prove that I cannot refute — or that I have not refuted his defence of it. The bible alone qualifies me to expose all his sophistry, or tliat of any man, on that grossest and most un- feasible of all the impostures that have, in any age or nation, been obtruded on mankind. The gentleman has spoken of various natural transubstantiations ! Astonishing ! Who ever thought any thing else, but that all organi- zed bodies, all earthly substances, nay, indeed, that all matter was susceptible of real changes, and new combinations and transubstanti- ations ■? But where is the analogy ] They are real and apparent, visible and sensible transubstantiations. But the universe affords no transubstantialion, similar to that for which the Bishop contends — Nothing transubstantiated, and yet the same to all our sense and reason. But in the name of reason itself, what distress or pressure of mis- fortune has induced this learned gentleman to appeal to the miracle in Cana of Galilee — to the transubstantiation of water into wine 1 That was really a transubstantiation. It did not look like water — taste like water, smell like water, nor operate like water. It was real wine, in color, taste, smell, and all its sensible properties. What a refuta- tion has the gentleman found in his own illustration ! ! The Bishop's remarks upon " eating the word,'''' &c. &c., are equal- ly unhappy, and extravagant. He has not done himself any honor on this occasion. Jesus said, " it is my meat and my drink to do the will of him that sent me." Truth is an aliment of the soul, and do- ing the will of heaven is a feast to every christian. But can the soul feast on literal flesh and blood ] ! 'Tis an outrage on common sense ! I was glad to hear him even quote the words, " Judge you what I say :" any appeal to reason, any word favorable to examination, com- ing from that quarter, falls on my ear like the sound of the dulci- mer. Jesus says, " Why do you not of yourselves judge what is right;" and Paul says, " Judge what I say ;" and John commands, " Believe not every spirit ; but try the spirits, for many false prophets are gone forth into the world." Now all these commands are address- ed to the common mass of christians. Well, then, says Paul, " The loaf for which we give thanks, is it not the communion of the body ol Christ," &c. ; " and the cup which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood ?" &c. : and the whole is called the Lord's table, the Lord's supper — an institution in remembrance of one that is absent, " Tii>L HE COME :" — uot the eating of one present, but the memorial of one absent. " You then," says Paul, " do show forth the Lord's death till he come.'''' The Corinthian abuses show, that they had no notion of a wafer and no wine — of a mass, a transubstantiation. Paul reproved them for their irregularities, and said this was not to eat the Lord's supper, (not to partake of a mass) : for some had eaten and even drunk to excess. The rich had brought a large supper, and put the poor to shame, who had no supper to bring. These were abuses which could never have arisen out of the doctrine of transubstantiation. In one word, there was as much transubstantiation in the passover, because it is called the ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 311 " Lord's passover," as there is in the institution of the supper, be- cause it is called the " Lord's body :" and he that cannot thus " dis- cern the Lord's body," in this institution, is not to be reasoned with on any religious question. Next comes the gentleman's splendid episode on the identification of the unfortunate Scotus, whose peculiar age and country I am no more bound to remember, or to tell here, than I am to relate the per- sonal or family history of every individual I quote. How many au- thors are daily quoted, whose age and country, not one in a hundred, may be able to relate with historic accuracy ! Are those who cite Co- pernicus, Zoroaster, Euclid, or even Nowton, obliged to tell when or where they were born, lived and died T It is, however, on the au- thority of Bellarmine I quoted this celebrated Roman Catholic au- thor, and ought 1 not, on such an endorsement, to regard Scotus as of hiorh authority in the Roman church 1 rime is becoming very precious, and as I have only two speeches after to-day, I shall not go farther into the details of the proposition, now under discussion, especially as I have not been met by the Bish- op on the two grand errors which nourish and sustain the baseless dream of purgatory and the sacraments of penance, auricular confes- sion, the mass, &c. &c. Indulgence is not identical with absolution, as my opponent seems to argue. Indulgence, as the term imports, is a licence to sin : abso- lution is the forgiveness of sin. An indulgence gives licence to sin, because it promises the person prospectively an exemption from the punishment ; and even to remain, in full force, in the moment of death ! My seventh proposition says : "Tlic Roman Cath )lic religioii, if infjllible and insusceptible of lefornntion, as allejjerl, is essentially anti-Anierican, being opposed to the genins of all free institutions, and pDsitivdy subversive of thein, opposing the general reading of the scripturis, and the dillu-ion of useful knowledge among the whole commu- nity, so essential to librrty and the permanency of good government." "Essentially anti-American." — This I have so far proved, as refer- ence has already been made to those doctrines, which make the Roman Catholic population abject slaves to their priests, bishops, and popes — to that hierarchy, which has always opposed freedom of thought, of speech, and of action, whether iu literature, politics, or religion. Such are the laws of mind — such the inlelleclual and moral constitution of man, that if in religion the mind hit enslaved to any superstition, espe- cially in youth, it rarely or ever can be emancipated and invigorated. The benumbing and paralizing influence of Itmnanism is such, as to disqualify a person for the relish and enjoyment of political liberty. For in all history, civil liberty follows in the wake of religious liberty ; insomuch, that it is almost an oracle of |)hilosophy, that religious liberty is the cause, and political liberty an effect of that cause, without which it never has been found. Compare not I'rotestant America with the republics of (ireecn or Rome; for there is scarcely any jmint of coincidence in this respect. There never was on earth so free and so equitable an institution as the Protestant insiitiitions of these United States. We shall now exemplify lh, 57. 23. It is Barronius, and not l)u Pin, says, " that God has made the poll- iical government subject to the spiritual.'''' This is the true doctrine of popery. But we shall hear another great cardinal. Again Btllarmine says; " Ry reason of the spiritual power, tlie pope, at least, indirectly, hath a supreme power even in tenipoial matters." Concerning which. Dr. Barrow rightly ohserves, "If the pope may strike princes, it matters not much whether it be by a downright blow or slantingly." We shall now very hastily run back from A. D. 1585 to 730, and give a few specimens of the true spirit, and tone, and action, of this institution, during its ascendency. A. D. 1585. "The bull of Pope Sixtus V. against the two sons of wrath, Henry, King of Navarre, and the Prince of Conde, beginneth thus: 'The au- thority given to St. Peter and his successors, by the immense power of the eter- nal king, excels all the powers of earthly kings and princes. — It passes uncon- trollable sentence upon them all — and if it find any of them resistmg God's or- dinance, it takes more severe vengeance of them, casting them down from their thrones, though never so puissant, and tumbling them down to the lowest parts of the earth, as the ministers of aspiring Lucifer.' And then he proceeds to thunder against them, ' We deprive them and their posterity forever of their dominions, and -kingdoms;' and accordingly he depriveth those princes of their kingdoms and dominions, absolveth their subjects from their oaths of allegiance, and forbiddeth them to pay any obedience to them. 'By the authority of these presents, we do absolve and set free all persons, as well jointly as severally, from any such oath, and from all duty whatsoever in regard of dominion, fealty and obedience, and do charge and forbid all and every of them that they do not dare to obey them, or any of their admonitions, laws, and commands." Bulla Sixti V. Contra Henr. Navarre, R. &c. Is this the genius of our government ? Are these the doctrines of the United States ] Here you have kings hurled from their thrones, and subjects released from their allegiance, without ceremony, by the vicars of Christ and the head of the church ! Who is this that sets aside oaths, and religious obligations, in the name of the Lord 1 " Why," says the modern Roman Catholic, " do you bring up these old things V Not so very old ! But will the bishop mention the council that ever repudiated this doctrine? The bishop says, ' they have been repudiated.' I thank him for conceding that they once existed ! But now for the proof of their re- pudiation. Nothing is infallible but a general council ; and what gene- ral council has set since the days of pope Sixtus V. 1 ! ! The council of Trent convened Dec. 13, 1515, and all its decrees were confirmed by the pope Jan. 26, 1564 ; consequently, the bull of pope Sixtus V. EO:HAX CATHOLIC RELIGION. 313 i% the bull of the Reformed Infallible Roman church after the council of Trent ! ! If it were orthodox then, it is orthodox now. We shall now hear pcpc Pius V. (almost canonized,) excommuni- cate the queen of England, and for aught I know, we Protestants were all excommunicated at the same time. A. D. 1570. *' He that n ig-iieth on hig:h, to whom is given all power in heaven and in earth, hath committed the one holv, Catholic and Apostolic church, out of wliich there is no salvation, to one aline on earth, namely, to Peter, prince ol the apostles; and to the Roman pontirt', successor of Peter, to be governed with a plenitude of power; this one he hath constituted prince ovei all nations, and ail l<>d, and that he should not reign or coiniiiand, being biiind by his sins and cast nway, and deprived by the I.or«l of nil honor and tiignilv) do show. nl purjiorts to be a complete copy of the works of liiguort. It hears no mark of being an e.xpur- crated edition. It is said to be an edition of what was mid aiuimritlcn befirr wilJi additiom. On turning to the place where he treats of fines and punisliiiieiitK inflicted for eonrubinage, be says that priests guilty of tbis offence, were, after two inelfertna! reprimands, to !)<> degraded from their functions. He refers to the council of Trent, and states what that council decreed. Smith throws us on Liguori, and liiguori on the coiinejl of Trent. There is notiiing in Liguori relating to iliat subject but this. The council wase;illed ;iI>ihM the year l.'il'i. 'I'iiis edition of the decrees of th(! couneil was edited by the (•(iiiiicil itself. I have had an abstract taken which I will read. It would take, some time to read the original, and 1 have a translation made by one of my scholars. I will rear! this. " In the r»< ordd of the decrees of the roniicil of 'I'rcnt, Session 2.?th, chap. 14th, there i THE the church; the sacred synod forbids that any individual holding the clerical office shall keep at his house or elsewhere, any inistress or unchaste wonian or cohabit with any such, under the penalty of having enforced against him the sacred canons, and erclpsiastical statutes regarding that matter. It is, then, espe- cially enacted that if when admonished by their superiors they shall not desist from all such unlawful and foi bidden acts, they sliall be deprived of the third pari of all their revenues and ( crlesiastir al dues: and if still persevering in their course, they shall not even heed a second admonition, they sliall be deprived of alt their ecclesiastical revenue, and suspended from the administration of eccle- biastical functions; and if, during this suspension, they shall continue obstinatb <»nd incorrig-ible, they shall be oTHl>fi IN IT worthy oF CENSURE. Ligori was spoken of bv the sacred Poalifl', Leo XII. in the highest terms; and his eminence the Serf-ne Cardin il uf Cistile, the Major Penitentiary, in his letters to the i3ishop of .Massiben, says, that Saint Ligori is not only an ornament to the Episcopal character bv the illustrious splendor of his virtues; but he shines re- splendent by his so'uM) DOCTRiNt, wliich )3 according to God. Doctrinani •anclam.ac serunium Di um." (I'ref. Ivlitoris.) In his preface to his Synopsis Mr. Smith observes : " If they deny that we have given a fair translation, we will then rhalleng^e them to come forward in a public assembly with the works of St. Ligori, when we promise to meet them, and submit our translation, and the original, to the inspec- tion of a committee, one half of whom to be chofen by ourselves, and the other half by the Roman clergy. Truth never phuns investigntion. If we have not given a fair, genuine, and true translation, and if we have not exhibited the doc- trinei of Ligori, and the church of Rome fairly and correctly, without garbling, or giving an erroneous construction, we will be willing to incur the consequenceu that we oiKjIit t<) expect, for having deceived the public." Synop. IVef. p. 12. I will thank the Bishop to inform me the date of his edition of the works of rjgori. Bkshop Purcell. — What is the date of Mr. Smith's edition 1 Mb. Campbem,.— 1H28. Bishop PtrtrKi.i,. — This edition [pointing to hi.s own"] was also published in 1828 : so that it appears both are the same. Mn. ('ampbei.i. [here taking u|) a volnmt! of tiie Bishop's copy of liigori read] " A'diVjo J\'<>ra Enirndatn." It hfiire appears that tiie Bishop's is n fw.w amended edition ,- so that, probably, this and the one used by Mr. Smith arc not tho same. Be this, iiowcvor as it may, nothing is lost by the oxatiiinalion : nothing is proved against >ir. Kmilh HH a translator, ami I shall write fortliwith to New ^'ork to Mr. Smith for the original Latin of this passagi- in his edition, and have it certified and published among this community. But were it lawful to read in this assembly, I have before me the de- crees of - ii S22 DEBATE ON TUB cil at Toledo, and here are references to various councils, such as Bi- vii Concilia, Tom. I. pp. 737, 739. Crabb. Concil. Tom. I. p. 449. Edition of 1551, and Pithou Corp. .lu. Canon, p. 47, as quoted by Dr. Brownlcc, wliich r<>vide; 'I'liiil niiv iilii ii, Ik'Iiik n frci- wliilr person, may be Rciniiltcd to become • ritizen of the L. S. or any ol ihiiii, on tlic lollow- Ing; rondjtion, an'riiot oth«-rwiic; That he shall have tlcciarc-d on oalli, or ofTir- tnation, before the iiuprenie lupcrior, ditlrici, or riniiit court, of loinc one of (be Ktntr*, or a court o( record, having a clerk and teal — 3 )'cart at Ua«t bfifor* ■droiMioo. 824 DEBATE ON THB Ht. Oitth of Intention. "That it Tras borutjlde, Iiis intention to bfconie a ritizon of the U. S. and to renounre forever, nil allcgiiiiue ami lidtlitv, to any forcii^n Prince, Potentate, State or Sovereignty, whatsoever; and |jarliculiirl_v, by name, the Prince, Poten- tate, State or Sovereionly, whtrei/f he may, at the time be n citizen or suliject. That he shall, at the time of his application to be adniitted, declare, on oath or artirniation, before a court as above. 2d. Oatii of Renitncialion , Atjurnlion , iance and fuh lity to every foreign Prince, Potentate, State or Sovereignty wliatevcr; and paiticniarly by name the Prince, Potentate, State, Sovertignly whereof he was before a ciiizc-ii or subject. The court admitting; the alien to be satisfied that he has resided five years within the U. S. one year in tlie state, and (liat he has behaved as a man of good moral character, attached to the princi[)l>s of the constitution of the (J. S. and well disposed to the gooeing rccpiired and admonished by tin: church, shall neglect to purge his land from this here- tical filthinew, he shall be tied up in the band of excommunication by the me- tropolitan and his coiii[)roviricial bishops. And if he should neglect to make satisfaction within a y«>ar, it should be sii^nified to the nope, that he miKht from that time pronounce the subjects absolved from allegiance to him, and expose his territories to be seized on by Catbolicf, who ex]>clliiig heretics, shall pos- sess them without contradiction. Uut Catholics, whj having taken the badge of tlie cross, shall set themselves to extirpate heretics, shall enjoy the same indulgence and be fortified with th« taiua privilege, a« is granted to those who go to th« racovcrjr of Ibc holy land." 326 DEBATE ON THE Anci, to save time, be it emphatically observed, that the council of Trent fully established, adopted, and re-promulged those decrees, and they are, at this moment, in full force at Rome. Until, then, a general council is called, and makes fallible the decisions of the great Lateran council; such is, and must be the dictum and belief of the Roman church; and, as I judge, there never will be another general council, this will ever be the doctrine of papal Rome, till the day of her death. Is this, I emphatically ask, the genius and spirit of republican America ? But edicts, canons, and decrees, are not a dead letter. They have been all personified, and acted out to the letter. Who has not lieard of that personification of every thing that is diabolically cruel — the Hoi,Y Office of the Inquisition 1 What abuse of language ! Think not, my friends, that I will rake up its ashes; that I will rehearse its horrible racks, and engines, and instruments of torture ; that I will describe a single auto da fc, one of the horrid tragedies of the acts of faith, whose flagrance language fails to speak. " It wns the vice of the age," my opponent has said. Of what age 1 Of Innocent III. ? Of the era of transubstantiation 1 No, indeed ; but of the age of Na- poleon ; of the age of pope Pius, the saint of 1814 ! Yes, of the pres- ent age ! It was got up, indeed, by Innocent (inapposite name !) III., and was fully in operation in Italy, A. D. 1251. Its first officer, Do- minic, was afterwards made a saint ! In Spain and Portugal it was perfected ; and its reign of terror, in unfigurative truth, transcends all description. My soul sickens at the thought. In Spain alone, from 1481 to 1814, about half a million suffered by it. Lorente (Paris edit. tom. iv. p. 271,) sets down the victims of one department of tor- ment, those burnt, at 33,912; and of other rigorous punishments, at 291,450. He is, by other historians, supposed to be far below the full amount. From the records of the inquisition, the manuscripts taken from the inquisitorial palace at Barcelona, when taken by siege in 1828, one may reckon, that in all Spain, in a little over three centu- ries, half a million suffered all manner of cruelties from this infernal tribunal. It was even employed as a means of converting the heathen, in pa- gan lands. It is said, that 800 persons have been condemned at one session, by one of its tribunals. And, still worse, in Seville, in the year 1481, 2000 persons were condemned to the flames, and 20,000 more to inferior punishments. Such were the tender niercies of these Roman gospel arguments to save men's souls from hell ! It was the vice of a dark age, and yet restored by Pius VII. in 182G! ! What! But, this is only one of the tribunals of persecution ; it was only one of tiie means of persecuting and destroying heretics and schis- matics. Shall I relate the persecutions of the Waldenses and Aibigen- ses, and other Protestants, sometimes called Lollards, Wickliffites, Hugonots, &c. feci Shall I tell of the millions in France, Spain, Portugal, Holland, England, Ireland, and elsewhere] Shall I tell of the massacre of St. Bartholomew's day? of the persecutions conse- quent upon the revocation of the edict of Nantz 1 or the Irish massa- cre'! and of all the other deeds of horror? I shall not attempt it. I cannot describe the slaughter of two millions, in the early crusades against Jews and infidels; nor of fifteen millions of Indians and pa- gans ; nor of a millioQ Waldenses, murdered and banished in a single KOMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 327 generation ! I say, again, 1 cannot relate these heart-stirring scenes ; and I shall only say, that historians and mariyrologists variously give the aggregate from ^//y to sixfy-eight mi//ions of human beings, that have been sacrificed and devoured by this Moloch ; this insatiable de- mon of persecution, as taught in theory and carried out in practice, by her who calls herself Holy Mother ! ! ! What a scarlet, crimsoned, cruel mother she is! On her will be avenged the blood of all martyrs. Even the persecutions of those whom she taught to persecute, lie just- ly chargeable against her. What guarantee, then, have we that this be- ing the native spirit of the system, it would not again repeat the same tragic scenes, in any country where it obtains an ascendancy] 'Tis true, indeed, that the Protestant powers in Europe hold it now in check. But, were these removed, from what premises would we in- fer, that the same means would not be resorted to in this and every Protestant country, so soon as this kind mother should feel it a duty, " to extirpate heresy'''' out of the land 1 I The doctrine is actually taught in her New Testament, in the notes appended to the Rhemjsh version. I will give you a passage or two. "And vvrien liis disciijles Jaiiits and John liad seen it, they said, l-oid wilt thou we say that lire come down from heaven, and consume them? And turning, he rebuked them, saying, you know not of wliat spirit you are." Luke ix.54, 55. " V'er. 55. He rtbiik'ed Ittem. Ts'ot justice nor all rig;orous punishment of sinners is h(re forbidden, Klias' fact reprehended, nor the cliuroh or chris- tian princes blamed for putting heretics to death: but that none of these should be done for desire of our particular revenge, or without discretion, and regard to their amendment, and example to others. Therefore, Peter used his power upon Ananias and Sapphira, when he struck them both down to death for dc- ym'idiyi^ ihe churrh." Khein. N. Tf-t. p. 109. This is a mistake. Peter struck not Ananias and Sapphira for dc- {rauding the church, (as these purblind commentators say but the ord himself struck them dead, for li/ing against the Holy Spirit. Christian princes, thus, in reading the Roman Testament, are taught to put heretics to death. "An! iiiaiiy r,f them that liiul followed curious things, brought together their books and burnt them before all; and counting the prices of them, they found the money to be filly thousand pence." Acts xix. 19. " Vcr. 19. Hooks. A christian man is bound to burn or deface all wicked books of what sort soever, especially heretical books. VVhirh though they infect not him always that keepelh them, vet bring forth coming, they ""^y be noisome and peroH ions to other that shiill have them and rend them after his death, or otherwise. Therefore hath the church taken order for condemning nil such book', and agaiiiiit the reading of thi' s their precepts." Ibid. Gregory IX. has laid down the general principle, with the greatest care and precision : "Be it known to all who are under the dominion of /lereiic*, that they are get free from every tie ofjidtlilyand duty to them; all oaths or solemn agree- ment to the contrary notwithslanding-." Decret. Greg. lib. 5, tit. 7. Hear now the decree of the council of Constance, in the case of John Huss, and Jerome of Prague ; who appeared there under the solemn pledge of the imperial protection. " Council of Constance, 1414, did solemnly decree that no faith is to be kept with an heretic. The person who has given them the safe conduct to come thither, shall not in this case be obliged to keep his promise by whatever tie he may have been engaged, when h.e has done all that has been in his power to do." Bruce. Free Thought, p. 120. The council of Constance then, not only so decided ; but caused those men, who appeared before them under an imperial pledge, to be taken and burned. Thus faitli was not to be kept with heretics accord- ing to said decree, and the practice under it by these " holy fathers V To confirm the whole with the utmost brevity I would add, the ho- ly, infallible, and last council of Trent formally recognized this de- cree of the council of Constance. It is then the standing and unrepealed doctrine of the Roman Catholic church, which must be as immutable and infallible as the council of Trent, Next we must notice the proscription of books as another specifi- cation. The council of Trent in its 25th session, decreed that a council under the pope should draw up and publish an index of books which ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 329 Xvfere to be prohibited in the church. Thus commenced and keeping pace with the introduction of liberal, or Protestant, or anti-Roman Catholic volumes it has grown into a respectable volume ; so that one of the finest libraries might be collected out of these proscribed books. Among these is the bible, which is said to have been the first prohibited in the council of Toloso. In the 4th of the 10 rules concerning prohibited books established by the Holy Fathers of the council of Trent, a license to read the bible is put into the control of bishops and inquisitors. But he that presumes to " read without such license cannot receive absolution of sins. '^ Amoug these prohib- ited books also are those of Locke, Milton, Bacon, Grotius, Galileo, Claude, Saurin, Sir Matthew Hale, Jeremy Taylor, Luther, Calvin, Melapcthon, — and, indeed, all the standard Protestant authors. Touching the liberty of the press, a decree of the 10th session of the Lateran council A. D. 1215, even Leo X. presiding expresses the Roman Catholic views of that chief root of the tree of liberty. The decree of the Lateran council was sanctioned by Trent and is now the orthodox faith of Rome. " l}y oiclo)- ot" tlic holy couricil, we, in fine, ordain and decree, that no person shall presume lo print, cr cause to be printed, an)|^ hook ov other writing whatso- ever, either in our citv (lionit- ) or in any other cities and diocesfs, unless it. shall first have been carffilly examined, if in this city, by out Vicar and tlie master of the holy palace, or it" ui other cities and dioceses, by the bishop or his deputy, with the inquisitor of heretical prnvilij for the diocese, in which the said impres- sion is about to be made ; and unless also it shall have received, under their own band, their written appro\al, jjiven without price and without dela)'. Whoso- ever shall presume to do otherwise, besides the loss of the books, which shall be publiciv burned, shall be bound by the sentence of excommunication." Caranza, p. 670. The council of Trent has also confirmed the doctrine of Leo X. and his Lateran council of 1515. Their first rule concerning pro- scribed books is : Jll books condemned hi/ the supreme pontiffs, or gen- eral councils before the year 1515 and not comprised in the present index are condemned." The creed of this said council of Trent moreover compels every Roman Catholic "to receive undoubtedly, all thint^s delivered, drjinrd, and dirland liij the sacred canons, and f^cneral councils and partirularli/ hi/ llii- Holy council if Trent." This church is as much opposed to the freedom of the press and Free discussion, and the circulation of the bible, as ever she was; but she has to yield n liltlr- id tiial irresistible innovator, called custom. TStiJi however a Rfiman bishop canoot, as a good and liege suiijcct of the pope, hut oppose, freedom of tlniiiirjit, speech and action in all inatters reiigir)UH. liisten to tiie following little bull of tim bishop of New York, published the other day against free discussion. In t nscrrlaininp the sentiments of your Ordinary on so important a aubjecl. The Church w«cly 2 c 2 -n 330 DEBATK ON THE ordains that nothing; of thn nature of this society can bo rstublishcd wilhoat (Ii« approbation of the Bishop of the Diocese, whcir it is inonnt to introduce it, and that permitted, it should be governed hy such ruhsniid regulations as to bininiar seem proper, for it obviously partaki s of the nature of a Theological school. Far be it troni nie to impede the progress of religious knowledge ; nothing could be more dear to my heart than to encourage whatever contributes eflectually to its promotion ; but j)laced as 1 am, as a sentinel over the sacred ark of religion, It is my imperative thify to prevent it from being touched by profane or unprac- tised haruls. So far from viewing this society in the light you see it, it is my decided con- viction that it ought not to be sanctioned by me ; how c;ui it be supposed that young men, whose education is chiefly mercantile or mechanical, can come with sufficient preparation to the discuss-ion of a question that re(iuires vast erudition, with a degree of research, which they cannot possess ; you cannot be ignorant of the severe mental discipline to which students are subjected in our Theologi- cal Seminaries, before they are allowed to commence the study of theology. You knovv also that this study is regulated by experienced and able professors, that young men are not allowed to grope their way with only their own feeble light, tiirough the dark mazes of deceitful cavil, and infidel sophistry. The members of this society, who thirst so much for religious knowledge, can read our elementary works, and also, the masterly productions of JVlilner, I'letch- er, Bossuet's history of the Variations, lately printed, and others, where they are sure to find the tenets of our faith explained with a precision and elegance that cannot fail to satisfy the sincere inquirer after truth. The precision of ideas," and elegance of expression in the imparting of religious knowledge, their preamble sets forth to be the main objects of this society, and it covers tne desire and intention of acquiring that species of tact and dexterity in theological de- bate, which would enable them to follow into the arena the fanatics of the day. All this I must condemn as well as a jiublication of the crude essays of tyros anion^ us. Let us dispute less and practice more. The church in the most positive manner prohibits all laymen from entering into dispute on points of religion with sectarians, " inhibeinus,"' says Pope Alex- ander IV., "neunquam Laicae Personie liceat publice vel private de fide Catholi- ca disputare ; qui vere contradicerit, Excomniuiiicationis laqueo innodetur."* Had you recollected this sentence, I am sure you would be far from calling on the Catholic young men of this city to beconu' members of a debating society on religious subjects, open to so many serious objections. " t .JIAN CATHOLIC EELIGIOX. 331 and be delivered over with Athan and Abiranx, and with those who say unto the Lord, " depart from us for we desire none of thj wa^'s ;'" as a fire is quenched with water, so let the light of him be put out forevermore, unless it shall repent him, aad make satisfaction. Amen! May the Father, who created man, curse him! May the Son, who suftered for us, curse him! May the Holy Ghost, who suffered for us in baptism, curse him! May the Holy Cross which Christ for our salvation, triumphing over his enemies, ascended, curse him! May the Holy and Eternal \"irgiii Mary, mother of God, curse him ! May St. Mi- chael,' the Advocate of the Holy Souls, curse him. May all the angels, principali- ties, and powers, and all heavenly armies, curse him! May the praiseworthy multitude of Patriarchs, and Prophets, curse him! May St. John the Precursor, and St. John the Baptist, and St. Peter, and St. Paul, and St. Andrew, and all other of Christ's Apostles together, curse him ! and may the rest of our Disciples and Evangelists, who by their preaching converted the universe, and the holy and wonderful company of Martyrs ana Confessor, who by their holy works are found pleasing to God Almighty. May the holy choir of the Holy Virgins, who for the honor of Christ have despised the things of the world, damn him I May all the saints from the beginning of the world to everlasting ages, who are found to be beloved of God, damn him! May he be damned wherever he be, whether in the house or in the stable, the garden or the field, or the highways; or in the woods, or in the waters, or in the church; may he be cursed in living and in dying! May he be cursed in eating and in drinking, in being hungry, in being thirsty, in fasting, in sleeping, in slumbering, and in sitting, in livmg, in working, id resting and blood letting! May he be cursed in all the faculties of his body . May he be cursed inwanllv and outwardly; may he be cursed in his brains and in his vertex, in his tcmijles, in his eye-brows, in his cheeks, in his jaw bones, in his nostrils, in his teeth aud grinders, In his lips, in his throat, in his shoulders, in his arms, in his fingers. May he be damned in his mouth, in his breasts, in his heart and purtenance, down to the very stomach ! May he be cursed in his reins and in bis groins; in his thighs, in his genitals and in his hips, and his knees, his leg^ and feet, and toe nails! May he be cursed in all his joints, and articulation of the members; from the crown of his head to the sole of his feet, may there be no soundness. May the Son of the living God, with all the glory of his luaj^esty, curse him! And may heaven with all the powers that move therein, rise up against him and curse and damn him; unless he repent and make satisfaction! Jtmtn. So be it. fie it so. .■Irnen. Ridiculous as this may appear — lauprhable or profane ; it is never- theless, but the echo of otic of the oni- hundred aualhemas com- manded in the council of Trent — one of the greater excoiunuinications due to an obstinate heretic. As still more indicative of tht; present views and feelings of the Roman see, on the subject of civil and relijjious liberty, I shall give you a few more extracts. I had laid olT several niodern documents of much point, and bearing on ibis proposition; but unfortunately, they were misplaced in my library, and I find them missing among the books I have brought with me. I liold in my hand, however, a little work in which I find some of them. This little v< clical Letter on the proscription of bad books — 'no means must be here omitted,' as tiie extremity of the case calls for all our exer- tions, to exterminnle the fnlitl pcsf which spreads througli so many works; nor can the materials of error be otherivise destroyed than by the flames, which con- sume the depraved eh incuts of the e\il." The secretary of the court of Vienna and counsellor of legation — I mean Frederick Schlcgel, who, in 1828, lectured on the philosophy of history in favor of monarchy and popery — one supreme bishop, and one supreme monarch — who was one of the Ausl^rian cabinet, Ike con- fidential counsellur of Prince Melternich — whose policy and opinions opened the way for Austrian efforts on the foundation of St. Leopold, to add America to the pope's dominions — I say, of this great man and his opinions, the author of a foreign conspiracy, as quoted by Doctor Beecher, thus speaks : "In the year 1828 the ceiebnitcd f'rederick .S(hlegel, one of the most dis- tingiiishtd literary men oflMiro|)e, delivered lectures at Vienna, on the philoso- phy of history, (which have not been translated into Knglish) a great object of which is to show themntval support tehich popery and monarcliy derive from each other. He commends the two .systems in connexion as deserving of uni- versal reception. He attempts to prove that the sciences, and arts, and all the pursuits of man, as an intellectual being, are best promoted under this perfect system of church and state: a pope at the head of the former; an emperor at the head of the latter. He contrasts with this, the system of Protestantism; repre- sents Protestantism as the enemy of good government, as the ally of republican- ism, as the parent of the distresses of Europe, as the cause of all the disorders with which legitimate governments are afflicted. In the close of lecture 17th, Vol. H. p. 286, he thus speaks of this country: The TRUE NURSERV of all these destructive principles, the revolutionary sclioolfor France and the rest of Europe, has been JVorlh America. Thence the evil has spread over many other lanils, either by ruilural contagion, or by arbitrary communication. lb. p. 122, 12.3. Such are the popular views of our institutions in the best and purest church district in the world : and the emigrants of that country with those opinions are daily crowding to our shores, and filling up this immense valley. These are they who are taught to execrate the lib- erty of the press, and to consider liberty of conscience pestilential er- ror, and that a spiritual monarch, and a political emperor are the very paragon of all e.vcellence in church and state. Is this compatible with the genius of our institutions? Are not such views and reasonings, posilivelij subversive ff them? Let nie observe from that book of Fessenden's of which my oppo- nent seemed to know so much yesterday : but the author of which he H05IAN CATHOLIC RELIGIOIT. 333 cannot now name, as I believe, (if he can, however, he may tell us something about him) — I say from the Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, and from some other documents before me, I would wish to read a few statements, to show that this said Roman Catholic In- stitution, chameleon like, first acconunodates itself to the customs of every country, and seems to inhale and exhale the popular atmosphere until it reaches its end ; (for well the Jesuit knov.s the means may be infinitely various, while the end is one and immutable,) and so soon as it gains the fulcrum of popular opinion and the lever of the majority, it builds up an empire, after the model of the Prince Metternich. This has hitherto been its history, in every climate, and country, and age. A single example of this policy, taken from the Encyclopedia, must suffice : " Various attctnpts have been made to biiiig- this church under the papal yoke; but without success. Tlie Portuguese liaviiig opened a passage into Abyssinia in the fifteenth century, an emissary was sent to exttnci t'le influence and authority of the Roman pontifl", clothed with the title of patriarch of the Abyssinians. The same important connuissiou was afterwards given to several Jesuits, when some circumstances seemed to promise fluin a successful and happy ministry; but the Ab^'sslnians stood so firm to the faith of their ancestors, that towards the close of the sixteenth century the Jesuits had lost nearly all hope in that quarter. About the beginning of the seventeenth century the Portuguese lesuits renew- ed the mission to Abyssinia, when the emperor created one of them patiiarch; and not only swore allegiance to the Roman pontil), but also obliged his subjects to forsake the rites and tenets of their ancestors, and to embrace the doctrine and worship of the Romish church. At length the emperor became so exasperated at the arrogant and violent proceedings of the patriarch in subverting the es- tablished customs of the empire, for the purpose of confirnn'ng the pope's au- thority, especially in imposing celibacy on some, and requiring divorce of others, who had married more than one wife, that he annulled the orders formerly given in favor of popery, baniihed the missionaries out of his dominions, and treated with the utmost severity all who had any connexion with tlic undertaking. From this period the very name of Rome, its religion, and its pontitl, have all along been objects of peculiar aversion among the Abyssinians." — Encyc. Relig. Knowl. p. 22. Thus have the Jesuits done in every country, and this will they do — first ingratiate themselves with the peoph;, and wlien they think thr'y are secure of their object, they will jirocc^ed to subvert the gov- ernment : for they are sworn and sold to tlie pop(! forever. The gentleman says, We are both foreigners ; indicating that we have equal rights and privileges. I did not use that term in an invi- dious sense, when speaking of my willingness to receive foreignt^ra. Nor do I oppose the princi|iles of my opponent, because of their hos- tility to Protestants only : hut becaiis(! of thi-ir hostility to Roman Catholics. It is from my views of the political and religious hear- ings, the ttwriporal and the eternal conscfjuences of the system, that I expose and oppose it. As a philanlhrojijsl, I am o|)poser! to the |)apal empire;, whether at home or abroad — in lOurope or America. But aiihoiiifli {lolilieally considered, in (>u>: sense, we both may be calleriihiiin^s bosom, on which lia/arus reposed, until hr^aven was opened to the souls of men, by the death of Jesus Christ? Was it heaven, or hell, or that intermediaU; place or stale, which Catholics call by the name of purgatory T It is tnccfisarily the latter: apart from the suflering of sense by purifying fire, it wrjujd \h; a stale i\\' mmtil or s|>iritnal suf- fering : as it was one of separation from (Jod, whose beauty the soul, released from the prison of the body, and tin- darkness of sin and ig- norance, 80 clearly discernK, and so ardently desires to etijoy. The Savior tells us to be reconciled (juickly with our adversary, while wo are in the way : lest we be delivered over to the judge, and cast into prison, whence we shall not be released, until wc shall have paid the 836 DEBATE OX Till! / last farthing. (Matt. v. 26.) What prison is this] What place of sorrowful detention on Ihc way to hcavcn/ij ghri/? Neither heaven, nor the abode of everlasting torments: conscquentlj', purgatory. " C/irinl (lied for our sins" says .St. Peter, (Isl Kpist. iii. 18,) " 6e- ing put to death in the Jltsfi, but enlivened in the spirit : in which also coming, he preached to tho.tc spirits that were in prison." This is the J lace, of which it is said, in the apostles' creed, "//c rfcsce/irfec/ en/o t//;" which was surely not the hell of the damned, but that tempo- rary hell, or hades, or purgatory, to whose inmates he announced the joyful tidings of their deliverance, where the first and the second Adam met, the type and reality. What is the meaning of the univer- sally prevalent practice, of which St. Paul speaks, of performinor pious works, called baptisms for the dead : " E/se ivhat shall they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at (ill. IVhy are they then baptized for them ?" (1st Cor. xv. 23.) " Hence, the council of Trent teaches: " That there is a purgatory, and that the souls detained there, are helped b_\ the prayers of the faithful, and particu- larly by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar." St. Cyril of Jerusalem, l^usebius, St. Jlpiphanius, St. Ambrose, St. Jerome. St. Augustine, and several othii- ancient fatliers antl writers, demonstrate, ttiat the doctrine of the church was always, and is now the same, as that which was de- fined by the council of Trent, witli respect both to prayers for the dead, and an intermediate state, which we call purgatory. How express is the authority of tlie last named father, where he says: " through the prayers and sacrifices ottbe church and alms-deeds, God deals more mercifully with the departed than their sins deserve." Serni. 172. Enchirid. cap. 109, 110. St. Chrysostom, who flourished within three hundred years of the age of the apostles, and nmst be admitted as an unexceptionable witness of their doctrine and practice, writes as follows: "It was not without good reason ordained by ttie apostles, that mention should be made of tlie dead in the tremendous mys- teries, because they knew well that these would receive great benefit from it." In Cap. i. Philip. Hom. 3. Tertullian, who lived in the age next to that of the apostles, speaking of a pious widow, says: " She prays for the soul of her hus- band, and begs refreshment for him." L. De Monogam. c. 10. St. Cyprian, who lived in the following age. says: " It is one thing to be waiting for pardon; another to attain to glory: one thing to be sent to prison, not to go from thence till the last farthing is paid ; another to receive immediately the reward of faith and virtue: one thing to suffer lengthened torments for sin, and to be chastised and purified for a long time in that fire; another to have cleansed away all sin by suffering." S. Cypr. L. 4. Ep. 2. The doctrine of the oriental churches agrees with that oi the Catholic church, in the only two points defined by her, namely, as to there being a middle state, which we call purgatory, and as to the souls, detained in it, being helped by the prayers of the living faithful. True it is, they do not generally believe, that these souls are punished by a material fire; but neither does the Catholic church require a belief of this opinion. On some occasions, Luther admits of purgatory, as an article founded on scripture. Melanctlion confesses that the ancients pray- ed for the dead, and says that the Lutherans do not find fault with it. Calvin intimates, that the souls of all the just are detained in Abraham's bosom until the day of judgment. In the first liturgy of the: church of England, there is an ex- press prayer for the departed, that "tiod would grant them mercy and everlast- ing peace." Collier's Eccl. Hist. Vol. II. p. 257. Bishops Andrews, Usher, Montague, Taylor, Eorbes, Sheldon, Barrow of St. Asaph's, and Hlandford, all believed that ttie dead ought to be prayed for. To these, I may add, the religious Dr. Johnson, whose published Meditations prove, that he constantly prayed for his deceased wife." The Universalists make hell a purgatory. The notion, that this doctrine fills the pope's coffers with gold, is too ridiculous to be refuted! Every Catholic knows its absurdity. As to the inlenlioa of the priest, about which the gentleman has found B03IAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 337 SO much to say, that is no difficulty. How do we judge of the inten- tion ] Simply, by the act, the surest evidence of its existence. Can we ask if a man has any intontion to eat his dinner, when we see him, sit down to table, take his knife and fork, use them, and eat till he is filled ; so when we see the priest docs what every priest does, and the faithful people know that he ougiit to do, we have the best evi- dence of his intention. Besides, what motive could he have for such a jrratuitous violation of the law of God and profanation of a sacra- ment. JS'emo rcpente pcssimus is an old and a true maxim. He would fall into other excesses, first, and be suspended — God will not aban- don his church ; and the sincere christian will always be rewarded by him, accordinjT to iiis deserts. No man goes suddenly, &c. see Secreta Monita. It was placed invidiously among the rubbish by the enemies of the Jesuits, if found amid the ruins of their house, as the whole society repudiated it. Every learned and sound critic, who is at all honorable, denounces the imposition — It is an old trick. Ovid in his 13th book, verse 59, 60, suggests the idea, in speak- ing of Ulysses' treachery, when he first had gold hid in the tent of Palamedes and then denounced him for having been bribed by the enemies of Greece. •' Fictutnque probavit " Criin. ;i, ( t oslcn lit (jU )cl )a;ii pr.rfoderat aiirutn." Shall I invent calumnies, when run out of proof of any man's dishon- esty? God forbid ! ^\ hat virtuous and immaculate family may not be thus assailed ? And the more virtuous and honorable they are, the more will they be disconcerted and overwhelmed, for the moment; but the more complete will be their own vindication and their slander- ers' disgrace in the end. The gentleman caimot get over what he said of Washington and our Hevolulionary heroes, " \.\\k fatal shaft is sticking in his side." God has given to the people, neither too much, nor too little power. He has given them no spiritual authority ; for as Jesus Christ said to his apostles, so may the priest say to his flock : " You have not cho- sen me." " No one durst assume the office of priest, but he that is call- ed to it, a.1 Jirtrnti ir«,i" — and he was not called by the people. In the Catholic church we solemnly appeal to the people for testimony for, or against, a candidate for holy orders. God has given the peo- ple reiuonabln |)ower, in teinpfiral matters, and revolutions have too often shown tlnir evils and calaniilies, in the most horrid and brutal excesses and the loss of innumerable lives. This is an awful penalty for the rash exercise of tem|)oral j)ower on the part of the people. Our own revolution was, perhaps, the calmest, the most temperate, the least abused for evil purposes by wicked man, because we had a "Washiniiton and kindred spirits to direct the 8tf)rm. 'I'hese, my wor- thy friend rails perjurers ! Ah (Jod has restricted the people, he haa also restricted their rulers, in their exercise of power. How many terribli; lessons have not kings been taught, for its abuse. Why can- not nations unite to select a common umpire; to whom all disputes should l(c; referred, atid thus the rrimes of kings, and revolution, with all its arcompanying horrors, by the peiiple, extinguished in the bud. I do not undertake to deft nd the popes in their use of the deposing power — and were my voice, at this moment, ringing in tho Vatican, 2D 4J 333 DEB ATE 0.^ TJIK instead of the Baptist church, Sycamore street, Cincimiati, 1 should not be reproved. There are in the religious, as well as in the spiri- tual world, two forces, liie centripetal, and the cenlrifiif;al. The see of Rome i%as the sun and centre of the system, to which all the pla- nets, revolving in beauteous harmony, tend. We bless, we love, we seek with ardor, by a kind of religious instinct, strong as the laws of gravita- tion, this common centre, which gives us all, our proper impetus and coherency. But like the planets, we arc not absorbed by it. We know its excellence, its usefulness, its destination, its limits. Now, to show you what our sentiments are, with regard to the tem- poral power of the pope, here is a standard work, the identical text- book of theology, which I studied in Paris many years ago. The au- thor is still living, and instead of being rebuked for what I am going to say, he has, on the contrary, been made bishop of Mans, in France. Mis name is Bouvier, and he is as j)ious a christian as he is a sound divine. I read you evidence from scripture, tradition and reason, in favor of the doctrine which is the burden of the proposition, viz. that ♦» the pope has no right, direct, or indirect, by any divine commission, to the temporalities of kings or other Christians." When was the deposing power first claimed by the pope 1 Ecclesiastical history answers, in the 10th century. Then by the rule which I have alrea- dy laid down, it is no part of Catholic doctrine. It came a thousand years too late. '• Proposition. That the Roman PontiiT does not possess, by divhie right, any power, either direct or indirect, over the temporalities of itiai)s, imbued with this doctrine, opposed the arms of patience alone, to the most unjust and most cruel tortures, for more than three hundred years. Osius, bishop of Cordova, writes thus to the emperor Constantius, who favor- ed the Arians. " Do you not interfere with ecclesiastical matters," as already quoted. Pope Gelasius, in his epistle 8th to Anastasius, a violent enemy of Catholics, says, " There are two things, O emperor Augustus, by which principally, this world is governed, the sacred autlionty of the popes, and the authority of kings. (Labbe ti)m. 4. page 1122.) This pope, therefore, considered that each power was independent of the other. ]t can be proved, .")d. By theological reasoning. 1. That opinion ought to be rejected, which was entirely unheard of during the ten first ages; but that opin- ion which holds that the chief bishop has any just right even^indirect, over tlie temporal possessions of princes, or other christians, was, by no means, heard of during the ten first ages, to wit, down to the lime of Gregory VII. who in the year 1080, attempted to depose Henry IV. and disturljetl the peaceof the entire world, by the assertion of this novel rigiit. Therefore that opinion should be rejected, kc. 2. That opinion should be entirely rejected which would occasion most grievous evils, but the o])inion which we oppose, gives, &:c. 1. It renders harmo- ny between the priesthood, and the sovereign power, impossible. 2. It would prevent infidel princes from embracing the christian religion, and heretics from returning to the true church. 3. It would aflord a necessary occasion for con- tinual wars, if it were practised, which, experience has already tooclearly shewn. Therefore, it should be entirely r(jected,&c. ^c. &c. Now see here the scholastic method of proving propositions, and an admirable one it is. We say Isl, scripture leaches it, — 2nd, anti- quity corroborates it, — 3d, rea.«ion confirms it. That is the method we follow, in all our schools. This is the solid, and irrefutable man- ner in which this proposition is laid down and eslablislird. Docs this look like submillinir to the dictation of the pope in teni])oral matters'? Did the English ('atholics oiiey the j)retcndc(i absolution hull ? Did not Catholics under arms, and with arms, as in the case of Julius II. resist their acknowledged, and in his pro|)er sphere, respected Pon- tiff! Did they not tin his hands while they kissed his feet 1 Waddinpton tells us that when Louis XII. of France quarreled with the pope, he called a council of hisho|)s at Tours, and proposed the question, whether he could detain the pope, as his prisoner, on an occasion, which he described. They gave an afTiriiiative answer. This, in addition to what 1 have said, shows how the distinction of 1)ower, and of rights, was undcrstdtjd at that period, and every epoch, )ack to the apo8tf>lic ages. My friend asks for a disclaimer of these pretensions, on the i)art of the pope. Mr. ('AMrnKi.i.. — Nftt hy the po]ie, hut hy the councils. Bishop l'iitf:K.i,i,. — TIk^ grMieral councils never mach; the recogni- tion of this power, an article of faith ; why, then, should they dis- claim ill Here is what pope Innocent III. said. Ilis account of this affair is very curious. It is, indeed, a strong disclaimer, and every word deserves to hr maturely wi'ighcd. Cimi r<"X miprriorrni in trmporiililnia niinimc rfCo(>no«riil, «irii:jurl« iilteriui l.p^ione in »o «e juritdiclioni no«lrr nubjircrr pcjtwil, in rpio vidcniur oli(|uibui, qiiorl per tripaiim, iion (nntpiniii pater cum film, »«il iBncpiam princep' < uui tub- clilii potuit (liiipeu*nre. Ucj^i igitur |;ratiaiu i«ciiuut rsquisiti :>~quou uoa toluiu i." 340 debatje: on tuh in Ecclesiaj patrimonio, super quo plcnnm in trinporalibus gerinius potestatem, verum ctiani in aliis regionibiis, ctrlis Ciiusismspeclis, temjjoialein jmijclictiontm casiialiter t:\evctiu\is. Aon ijuolI ;:litiio juri pni'jutlicHif vilinius, vel putestatem nobJK indebitani usurpare, cum iion igiioranius Cliristurii in evangtiio rtspondisse; redite, quae sunt Cit'saris, Ca-sari, et (iu:e sunt Dti, IJco. IVopltr tjuocl postula- tus ut ha-reditateni diviiltrtt inUr duos : quis, in()uit, constituit uiejudicein inter vos? Sed quia in Deuteronoinio rontinettr, si (iitiicile et ainbiguuni apud te "udiciuni esse perspexeris, Surge et asrende ad locum, queni tligit Doniinus 'eustuus,&c. Liber V. E[)ist 12. Innocent III. Since the King bv no means recognizes a superior in temporal authority, he could submit to our jurisdiction witliout infrin^^ing upon the right of aiiotlier, in wliich it seems to some, that he could tKspi nsi', not as a father villi his children; butasH prince with his sul)jects ; thtrefore we granted tlie King nhat was re- quisite, because we not only exercise a tempor;il power, I7i crrlaincuses, in the j).itrinion_v of the church, over which we act witli full authority in temporalities, but also in other districts, certain matters being considered on : IN'ot that we wish to determine prematurt ly of another's right, or usurp a ]H)wer not due to us : since we are not ignorant of what Christ has said in the gospel. On account of which he was asked to divide an inherit^Dce bttween two, who, says he, hu» appointed me judge between ye? But that it iswriltm in Deuttr jiomy, if you find a dithcult and doubtful case, rise and repair to the place, which the Lord voiir God has chosen, &<•. B. V. E. 12. Innocent III. Here the pope, himself, quotes scripture and precedent, against the assumption of such power. Next — behold the testimony of a particular council, the doctrine of the ancient Fathers, of an eminent divine, the celebrated Arthur O'Leary, on the matter before us, and on persecution for conscience sake. The Council of Toledo lorbids the use of violence to enforce belief: "Because," add the lathers," God shows mercy to whom he tliinks fit ; and hardens whom he pleases." " Pnecipit sancta sy nodus nemini deinceps ad credendum vim in- ferre. Cui enini Deus vult, miseretur ; et queni vult, indurat."* And the Council of Lateran, under Tope Alexandtr the third, acknovi ledges, that the church rejects bloody executions on the score of religion, which proves to dem- onstration, that the canon charged to the fourth council of Lateran, under Inno- cent the third, in which canon, " the secular powers are addressed to take an oath, to exterminate all heretics out of their territories, and in case of refusal, to have their subjects absolved from their allegiance, and the lands of the heretics to be seized by the Catholics," not heheve that (Jod pave to the church any power to iiiterferi- with our civil ri^htxor our civil concerns. Christ our I,ord refused to interfere in the division of the iiilieritaiice between two brothers, one of whom rerpiested that interference. The civil tribiiniilH of Jiiden were vesferl with siifTirirnl authority for that purpose, luid he did not transfi-r it tohisBposlles. It must hence be apparent ttiat any idea of the Itonian ('atholics of those republics being in nnv way under the inlliience of any foreign ei <|rsi«»ticBl power, or Inleetl of any church authority in the exercise of their civil riglits, i* a serious miitakc. There is no class of our fellow citizens more free to think. • Flaury, Discoorf, 9. No. 0. 2dQ 343 DEBATE ON THE and to act for themselves on the subject of our rights than we are, and I believe there is not any portion of the Aineriraii family more jealous of foreign influence, or more ready to resist it. Wc liave brethren of our church in every part of the globe, under every form of government. This is a subject upon which each of us is free to act as he thinks proper. We know of no tribunal in our church which can interfere in our proceedings as citizens. Our ecclesiastical authority existed before our constitution, is not aHected, i)y it; there is not in the world a consti- tution which it doe? not precede, with whkh it could not co-exist; it has seen nations perish, dynasties decay, empires prostrate; it lias co-existed wilh all, it has survived them all, it is not dependent upon any one of them; they may still change, and it will still continue. We now come to examine what are called the persecuting laws of our church. In the year 1215, at the council of Lateran, certain heresies were condemned by the first canon; and amongst other things this canon recites as Catholic faith, in opposition to the errors of those whom it condemned, that there was but one God the Creator of all things, of spirits as well as bodies; the author of the Old Testament and of the Mosaic dispensation, equally as of the J\ew Testament and of the Christian dispensation; that he created not only the good angels, butal«o the devil and the bad angels, originally coming good from his hand, and becoming wicked by their own malice*; i^c. In its third canon it excommunicates those hei-etics, and declares them to be separated from the body of the church. Then follows a direction, that the heretics so condemned, are to be given up to the secular powers, or to their bailiffs, to be duly punished. This direction con- tinues to require of all bishops and others having authority, to make due search within their several districts for those heretics, and if they will not be induced to retract their errors, desires that they should be delivered over to be punished. There is an injunction then to all temporal lords to cleanse their dominions by exterminating those heretics: and if they will not, within a year from having been so admonished by the church, cleanse their lands of Ikis heretical filth, they shall be deprived if they have superior lords, and if they be superior lords an(i be negligent, it shall be the duty of the metropolitan and his provincial bishops to exconnnunicate them, and if an}' one of those lords paramount so ex- comniunicated for this negligence shall continue during twelve months under the excommunication, the metropolitan shall certify the same to the pope, who, find- ing admonition useless, shall tlepose this prince, and absolve his subjects from their oaths of fealty, and deliver the territory over to Catholics, who naving ex- terminated the heretics sliall remain in peaceable possession. This is the most formidable evidence adduced against the position which I have laid down, that it is not a doctrine of our church, that we are bound to persecute those who differ from us in belief. I trust that I shall not occupy- very much of your time in showing, that this enactment does not in any way weaken that assertion. I shall do so, by satisfying you that this is a special law for a particular case; and also by convincing you that it is not a canon of the'church respecting an}' of those points in which we admit her infallibility; nor is it a canon of the church. The doctrines condemned in this first canon originated in Syria, touched lightly at the islands of the Archipelago, settled down in Bulgaria, and spread into the south of Europe, but were principally received in the vicinity of Albi, in France. The persons condenmed held the Manicliean principle of there being two crea- tors of the universe; one a good being, the author of the New Testament, the creator of good angels, and generally of spiritual essence; the other an evil be- ing, the creator of bodies, the author of the Mosaic dispensation, and generally of the Old Testament. They stated that marriage was unlawful, and co-opera- tion with the principle of evil was criminal. The consequences to society were of the very worst description, immoral, dismal, and descdating. The church examined the tloctrine, condemned it as heretical, and cut ofl' those who held or abetted it, from her communion. Here, according to the principles which I have maintained before you, her power ended. Beyond this wc claim no authority: the church, by divfnc right, we say, infallibly testifies what doctrines Christ has revealed, and by the same right, in the same manner, decides that what contra- dicts this revelation is erroneous; but she has no divine authority to make a law which shall strip of their property, or consign to the executioner, those whom she convicts of error. The doctrine of our obligation to submit does not extend to force us to submit to an usurpation; and if the church made a law upon a ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 343 subject beyond her commission for legislation it would be invalid; there would be no proper claim for our obedience: usurpation does not create a right. The council could by right make the doctrinal decision; but it had no right to make the temporal enacliiient: and where there exists no right to legislate on one side, there is no obligation of obedience on the other. If this was then a canon of the church, it was not one ia making which she was acting withm her consti- tutional juris liction, it was an usurpation of temporal government, and the doc- trine of infallibility does not bear upon it. Every document respecting this council, the entire of the evidence respecting: it, as well as the very mode of framing the enactments, prove that it was a special law regarding a particular case. The only persons whose errors were con- demned at that council were those whom I have described. The general prin- ciple of legal exposition restraining the application of penal enactments must here have full weight, and will restrain the ap[)lication of the penalty to the only criminals brought within its view. But the evidence is still more confirmed, by the special words of detinile meaning, tliis, and Jilth, which were specially descriptive of only those persous^ the first by its very nature, the second by the nature of their crime; and the continued exposition of the enactment restrained its application to the special case, though frequentlv attempts had been made by individuals to extend its application, not in virtue of the statute, but in virtue of analogy. It would then be improperly forcing its construction to say that its operation was to be general, as it evidenti}' was made only for a particular case. Id viewing the preamble to this council, as well as from our knowledge of history, we discover that this was not merely a council of the church, but it was also a congress of the civilized world. The state of the times rendered such assemblages not only usual but necessary: and each legislative body did its own business by its own authority; and very generally the subjects which were de- cided upon by one body in one point of view, came under the consideration of the other assembly in a diflerent point of view, and their separate decisions were engrossed upon a joint record. Boinetimes they were preserved distinct and separate, but copyists, for their own convenience, brought together all the articles regarding the same subject, from what source soever they were obtained. Such was precisely the case in the instance before \ii. There were present on this occasion, by themselves or by their legates, the king of Sicily, emperor elect of the Romans, the emperor of the east, the king of France, the kingof Kngland, the king of .Arragon, the king of Jerusalem, the king of Cyprus, several other kings, and lords paramount, so- vereign states, and princes. Several of the bishops were princes or barons. In the ecclesiastical council, the third canon terminated exiiclly in one sentence, which was that of the excommunication or separation from the church, of those whom the first canon had condemned, whatever name or names they might as- sume; Irecaiise they had in several places several appellations, and were con- tinually dividing olf and changing names a.s they separated. The duty and the jurisdiction of the council came to this; and the ancient records give no more M the portion of its enactments. But the congress of the temporal powers then made trie subsetpient part as their ennctment: and tliUH this penal and civil re- gulation was not an act of the council, but an act of the congress : and it is not a canon concerning the doctrine of the church, nor indeed is it by any means a canon, though the copyists have a'lded it to tin; canon as regarding {he very same subject ; and as confessedly the excommuniculion in th<' tliini canon re- garded only the special case of those particular heretics, the addition of the penal enactment (o this narticular canon is confirmatory evidence that those who adde>(s which were committed under the pretext of its execution, nor ran tiny rational man pretend that because of the existence of a special law for a particular pur- 344 DEBATi: ON THE pose, every case which may bethought analogous lo that for which proTision was made is to be iileo;nlly aubjerteii to those provisions. We are now arrived at the i)h\(e where we may easily find the origin and the extent of the papal power ot deposing sovereigns, and of absolving sul.jtcts from their ouths of allegiance. 'I'o judge properly of facts, we must know their special circumstances, not their mere outline. The circumstances of Christep- Jom were then widely diflereiit from those in which we now are placed. Europe was then under the feudal system. I have seldom found a writer, not a Catholic, who, in treating of that age and that systtni, has been accurate, and who has not done us very serious injustice. But a friend of mine, who is a respectable member of your honorable body, has led me to read Hallam's account of it, and I must say that I have seldom met with so much candor, and, what I call, so much truth. From reading his statement of that system it will be plainly seen that there existed amongst the Christian potentates a sort of federation, in which they bound themselves by certain regulations, and to the observance of those they were held not merely by their oaths but by various penalties, sometimes they consented the penalty should be the loss of their station. It was of course ne- cessary to ascertain that the fact existed before its consequences should be declared to follow ; it was also necessarj- to establish some tribunal to examine and to de- cide as to the existence of the fact itself, and to proclaim that existence. Amongst independent sovereigns there was no superior, and it was natural to fear that mutual jealousy would create great difficult}- in selecting a chief; and that what originated in concession might afterwards be claimed as a right. They were however all members of one church, of which the Pope was the head, and, in this respect, their common father : and by universal consent it was regulated that he should examine, ascertain the fact, proclaim it, and declare its conse- quences. Thus he did in reality possess the power of deposing monarchg, and of absolving their subjects from oaths of fealty, but only those monarchs who were members of that federation, and in the cases legally provided for, and by their concession, not by divine right, and during the term of that federation and the existence of his commission. He governed the church by divine rjghf, he deposed kings and absolved subjects from their allegiance by human concession. I preach the doctrines of my church by divine right, but I preach from this spot not by that right but by the permission of others. It is not then a doctrine of our chiircli that the pope has been divinely com- missioned either to depose kings or to interfere with republics, or to absolve the subjects of the former from their allegiance, or interfere with the civil con- cerns of the latter. When the persecuted English Catholics, under Elixabtth, found the pope making an unfounded claim to this right, and upon the shadow of that unfounded right making inroads upon their national independence, by declaring who should or who should not be their temporal ruler, they well showed how little they regarded his absolving them from their allegiance, for they volunteered their services to protect their liberties, which their Catholic ancestors had labored to establish. And she well knew that a Catholic might safely be entrusted with the admiralty of her fleet, and that her person was se- cure amongst her disgraced Catholic nobility and gentry, and their persecuted adherents; although the Court of Rome had issued its bull of absolution, and some divines were found who endeavored to prove that what originated in vol- untary concession of states and monarchs was derived from divine institution. If then Elizabeth, of whose character I would not wish in this place to express my opinion, was safe amidst those whom she persecuted for their faith, even when the head of their church absolved them from allegiance, and if at such a moment they flocked round her standard to repel Catholic invaders who came with con- secrated banners, and that it is admitted on all hands that in so doing they vio- lated no principle of doctrine or of discipline of their church, as we all avow : surely America need not fear for the fidelity of her Catholic citizens, whom she cherishes and whom she receives to her bosom with affection and shelters from the persecution of others. Neither will any person attempt to establish an analogy be- tween our fefleration and tliat of feudalism, to argue that the pope can do p.mongst us what he did anion2:st I'uropean potent.itcs under cirnmistances widely different. My worthy opponent said, that he would only tmich on persecution. My friends, persecution had marked me for a victim in my native land, and forced me to seek an Asylum in America, when I was young and friendless ! Persecution is there, in full operation at this R05U.N CATHOLIC RELIGION. 345 very hour. Scarcely a breeze comes across the ocean, without bring- ing on its wings, fresh tidings, of blood, shed under Protestant per- secution — by ministers of the Protestant faith. Widows there kneel in the blood of their own children ; and, because excess of grief has made them maniacs, they drink that blood, and curse the authors of their misery. Is not this true ? Does not the un'verse know and shudder at it 1 And having been compelled to flee from intolerance, having fought against it, must we still see the green-3yed monster, trampling upon the vine and tig tree, here, where we had hoped to sit down under their shade, in safety, and in peace, with our brethren of every denomination 1 Must we still fear the midnight knock at the door, and the domiciliary visit, by a brutal soldiery 1 Must the perishing orphans see the bread taken out of their mouths by rapacious parsons, and their mother's cloak (their only covering of a wintry night) distrained, to pay the tithe proctor T Where will you find tyranny like this ? Would this be a better state of things, than what we, in this free country enjoy ? Bigots would blast this glorious prospect. They would proscribe one sect after another. The appetite for blood, they have, even now, evinced, and we know, when once indulged, how hard it is to sate it ! But I must call upon Protestant testimony for the wrongs of Ireland — and I will bnly touch upon the persecution. Taylor, a graduate of Trinity Col- lege, in his history of Ireland, says : ■■ It uould be a mtre w;>ate of words to reprobate this iniquitoux law, or ra- ther this violation of all law, human and divine. IS'o Irish Protestant ran pe- ruse its endctnitnls without a blu«h for the shame thus brought on his religion, when it was thus virtually declarid that the reformed system should owe it* • trength and security, not to the purity of its principles, not to the excellence of its doctrines, but to robbery and oppression, to dissentioii between father and child, to stimulating one neighbor to sei/.e the fruits of another's industry, to the desecration of a solemn t^aci anient, by making it a test for ofTire. ilow can we be surprised tlial the reformed religion is unpopular in Ireland, when by this and similar laws, a Protestant legislature virtually declared that Protestantism colli 1 not be secure unless it entered into alliancr with iielial. Mammon and Moloch?" Hist, of Irrlaml, Hy W. C Taylor, F.sq. A. B. of Trinity college, Dubllii, page Km, Vol. 2n I. New York edit.' 1833. Now tell me if the annals of Catholicism can produce any thing Hke a paralU'l to this ! After enumerating the most tyrannical laws that Draco, or Dioclecir\n ever enacted, (wn we discover more pro- scription — more cruelty 1 Aiy friends, I do not blame the Protestant rclif^ion for this. It is the spirit of the country and government; and the shame is, that when (Jatholic governments have ceased to persecute, Protestant ones continue to do r.o. My friends, were I to roi)<;nlt my own feelings, I should be better fileased to draw a veil over tlir;sc Inrrors ; but my opponent made al- usions to the in(|iii)Htion, as an argument that, if ever the ("atholics became the most numerous, they wfnild make it a part of tlieir Ry«tem to persecute ; as if llie nnmc argument, if argument it r\u\ he railed, would not be ef|\ially strong against all tlie jealostant principles, and of tlie debasing, degrading, and enslaving principles of the pa])acy, linteiuied to have drawn a full comparison between the Protestant and ('alliolic fiarts of Ireland; the Protestant and Catholic countries of Swit7.or- and — between Spain, Italy, Portugal, and Protestant England — 848 DEBATE ON THE between the United Stales and the South American States^^betwten Protpstant and Roman Catholic America. But I cannot now attempt it ; and much do I regret it : for such a comp;uison fairly drawn, would amount to the most satisfactory demonstration of the political, literary, and moral tendencies of the two systems. Plain, as proof from holy writ, it would thus liave appeared, that this superstition, like the touch of the torpedo, lays a bemimbinor, paralizing, and blighting hand on all within its grasp. The gentleman is yet on indulgences and purgatory, when he ought, in reply to my last speech, to have endeavored, if possible, to relieve his cause from imputations the most serious and the most revolting to American ears. I have not thought it important to descant upon the tariff of sins, or to give a tabular view of the prices at which certain sins were rated in gold and silver in the market of indulj^ences. Nor have I at all inquired why, in this tax-book, for killing a layman a less Bum is asked than for simply striking a priest, wiliiout breaking the skin. These questions, though capable of solution from authentic docu- ments, are the dreams of purgatory I deem so inferior, and so un- blushingly barefaced impositions, that I prefer matters of more grave concern to this community for the time allotted us. That indulgences are bona fide licenses to commit sin, and not simple absolution for past sins, is as susceptible of proof as that Martin Luther began the Protes- tant reformation. The gentleman will not defend the popes, he says, in their attempts to exercise supreme political power; but asks, "Did the kings of the nations ever acquiesce in it?" That kings for centuries received and held their crowns at the sovereign pleasure of the popes, is just as ob- vious a historic fact, as that there were popes at all. Sometimes, in- deed, the kings fought against these assumptions, and sometimes they acquiesced. But the ready subordination of the state to the church evinced in the magistrates executing the anathemas of the church, in putting to death those denoted as heretics by the church, shows in what a state of subserviency and pliancy political princes were held by the popes. That is just the very terror of church and state — ;the very supremacy which we fear, and which is so antipodal to our institutions. It is putting heretics or reformers to death, and supporting a human priesthood by the state according to the dictation of the church, which makes that union, or subserviency, so wicked and odious in our estima- tion. And will the gentleman ask, what Roman Catholic ^tate, nation, or prince, ever did such a thing ? ! In his counter displays of Roman Catholic doctrine, my friend has not given you the trans-Alpine doctrine. The Cis-Alpiuo, or Gallican doctors, are not of the old Roman Catholic school. They are almost semi-protestant on those very points on which he lias introduced thern. They are no evidence against the standard doctrines of that church on these questions. The French Catholics began to stand aloof from the high and haughty pretensions of their trans-montane brethren. They are the most liberal portion of the Roman church, and have, con- sequently, done more for the promotion of science than all the rest of the Catholic world put together. Bishop England gives their views. I asked for an authentic disclaimer of the attributes of the Roman church, and of those acts and deeds indicative of her tyrannical, op- pressive and persecuting spirit which I have detailed. I ask this still ; EO>U.N CATHOLIC RELIGION. 349 and while I do it in a tone indicative of that earnestness which the occasion requires, I do il in the same benevolence to my opponent and his party which 1 felt and expressed at the beginning of this discus- sion. The times and the occasion peremptorily demand it. We know what individual priests and bishops have said against popes and coun- cils, and their proceedings, and against other parts of that system: but these are said for effect ad caplandum vulgus, and will be unsaid by the same individuals, or by others, when occasion requires. I have brought very serious allegations against the lioman Catholic institu- tion, and authorities for them — all of them authentic, and most of them never disputed by my opponent. He disclaims these principles, acts, and movements : but he disproves not one of them. Nor would the disclaiming of them by all the bishops in America, disprove one of them. The council of Trent has ordained and enjoined all these prin- ciples of implicit and blind obedience, intolerance, proscription, and persecution. No council has since met, and no power but a general council can define a single article of faith, or rule of manners, accord- innr to the declarations of my antagonist. Indeed, the doctrine of tho council of 'JVent must remain immutalile and infallible while time en- dures, according to him : for no other general council can possibly contravene it ; and, therefore, while the Roman church exists, she must be, what I have shown she was, before and since the council of Trent. This council met in a boisterous lime. They met to oppose and put down Protestantism. They knew the allegations of Protestants against their doctrine. If then, they could have abandoned those prin- ciples for the sake of either reclaiming or defeating the Lutherans, that was the time to do it. They sat long enough, and debated with zeal enough ; and yet they dare not discuss the papal authority. Tho pope forbade them to debate his office, jurisdiction, or authority, and ihey did not attempt it. Tho pope signed their decrees, and all that was done there was done irrevocably and forever. The disavowal or the disclaiming of any priest or bishoj) in the Roman Catholic church, is not worth more, and has no more authority, than mine. It is, therefore, of no value for my learned opponent, or any American prelate to say that he does not approve this or that; or, agree to this or that. They must all submit to, and they will all inculcate on all suitable occa- sions, every decree of the council of Trent. Thus did the Jesuits in Abyssinia. They first ('xphined away every thing: but finally ex- plained it bnck again, and had almost Haddled tho pope and tho coun- cil of Trent forcvT on those nnfortunnto Abyssirnans. I could, had I the time now, from that very history of Ireland from ■which the gentleman read you an extract, a copy of which I loo have lying on lhionnry spirit which i« «o pruiirwor- thy in others, should he ihought so wirkrd niul to danceroiis in (lirni. Let ui inquire iato this mallrr calmly. Why is it that Ihr Cntliolics are pur- •lied with siirh pertinacity, with such viiidiclivrnrs*, «ith such nilhlin iiiale\o- lencr? Whrr.innot llmr |>cculiar opinions be opposed by Brtciiiiu iil, by per- ■iiaiiuii, by reiuonMrarice, as one chritlian seel should oppose f »