Page images


OF THE EUCHARIST. without giving his disciples any warning beforehand of his meaning to speak figuratively, and without their considering beforehand the bread and wine as signs and representations of any thing else, should have abruptly told them, “ This is my body," “This is my blood," had he not meant they were so indeed. For abstracting from the change which Christ was pleased to make by his almighty word, a bit of bread has no more similitude to the body of Christ than an oak tree has to Alexander the Great; so that nothing but the real presence of Christ's body and blood could verify his words at his last supper, or vindicate them from being highly absurd and unworthy the Son of God.

(11) Page 63.-Q. Why (11) If Christ consecrated and gave should Christ, at the first it in both kinds as here admitted, it institution of the sacrament, must be, as I have before shewn, a consecrate and give it in divine precept” to receive it in both both kinds, if all Christians kinds. Still, if, even contrary to your were not always to receive present admission, you persist in your it in both kinds ?

fearful denial, suffer me to remind you, A. Because, according to our Saviour said not, “ This bread con-. the faith of the Catholic tains (or, if you prefer it is) both my Church, it is a sacrifice as body and blood;" but of the bread alone :

a sacrament, and he said, “ This is my body," then of the particularly requires the ex- cup, “This is my blood.” None were exhibiting to God the body cluded by our Lord; nay, all were com- ; add blood of his Son under manded to receive in both kinds. Why the veils that represent the does the Romish Church differ so widely shedding of his blood and from Scripture? Where are we “rehis death, and therefore the quired to exhibit to God the body and nature of the sacrifice re- blood of his Son?".. of under the quires the separate conse- veils, &c.,” whereby it appears to be both cration of both kinds; which, the thing signified and the representation being consecrated, must be of that thing! received by some one, and Impotent reasoning, and more impoby no one more properly tent conclusion ! than by the minister.

well as

[ocr errors]



Page 78.-Q. What do We must " search the Scriptures, you mean by the mass ? according to our Lord's command, for

A. The mass is the Litur. they only can enable us to penetrate this gy of the Catholic Church, « veil" or mist that blinds the minds of and consists in the consecra- the young and unwary. Let us, then, tion of the bread and wine

as St. Paul says,

"search the Scriptures into the body and blood of daily whether these things are so. See Christ, and the offering up Rom. x. 6, 9; Heb. vii. 26, 27'; ix. 24 of this same body and blood to end; x. 10-13. We shall then be to God by the ministry of convinced no such sacrifice is ordained; the priest, for a perpetual and moreover continually, since Christ memorial of Christ's sacri. once offered himself, and then for ever fice upon the cross, and a sat down at the right hand of God." continuation of the same till the end of the world.

(13) Page 79.-Q. Have (13) Yes; but this was “to typify the the servants of God, from Lord's death till he came." He who the beginning of the world, came to fulfil, and was " the end of the been always accustomed to law." We are expressly told that “afterhonour him with sacrifices ? wards there remaineth no more sacrifice

A. Yes, they have; wit- for sins.” Judaism again! Where does pess the sacrifice of Abel, the Gospel dispensation ordain sacrifices ? Noah, Melchizedek, Abra- See Eph. ii. 14, 15, to 17; also Heb. ham, Job, and the many viii. 1-7. different kinds of sacrifices prescribed in the law of Moses.

(14) Page 80.-Q. Why (14) If abolished, because but figures are all these sacrifices abo- of the Truth (Christ), how, when he lished now?

who is the Truth has offered himself A, Because they were once for all,” shall sinful man presume but figures of the sacrifice to offer again, and command to descend of Christ, and therefore from heaven the Son of God? Alas! were to give place to his alas ! “ Behold to obey is better than sacrifice as figures to the sacrifices, and to hearken than the fat of truth.

rams.” Saul offered a sacrifice not comPage 81.-Q. What is manded. Was it accepted ? Disobethen the sacrifice of Chris. dience cost him his kingdom! May we tians under the new law ? not be endangering our precious souls ?

A. We have no sacrifice Prove from Scripture that Christ combut that of Christ, which he manded his apostles to offer him up, once offered upon the cross, after “ he had laid down his own life,' and daily offers by the mi- and then I say the mass is not—"an idonistry of his priests upon latrous sacrifice." the altar, in the Eucharist.

[ocr errors]


LATIN Page 107.-'Tis not only Judaism again! The law of Moses ! not necessary that the people when we have seen “the end of the law should hear or recite the in the person of Christ.” Our Saviour same prayers with the priest, was seen “ when in the synagogue he but that even the very see- stood up for to read, and the eyes of all ing of him is more than them that were in the synagogue were God was pleased to require fastened on him." See St. Luke iv. 15 in his law.

to end of 22; and so were the apostles.

Produce higher authority. (16) Q. But does not (16) It is true, St. Paul does not St. Paul (1 Cor. xiv.) con- mention Liturgy, that is the word Liturgy, demn the use of unknown neither do I find “extemporary prayers; tongues in the Liturgy of but since, in the very chapter cited, he the Church?

speaks of praying, singing, exhorting, A. He has not one word and blessing, in an unknown tongue, and in that whole chapter of the that "thereby the other is not edified," Liturgy of the Church; we may, indeed, not merely “reasonably but only reprehends the conclude,” but be persuaded, the whole abuse of the gift of tongues Church service is included, though he which some amongst the uses not the word Liturgy! Wherein Corinthians were guilty of, consists the service of the Church ? who, out of ostentation, (“The public form of prayer"-as the affected to make exhorta- word Liturgy is defined by our best tions or extemporary pray- lexicographer.) For St. Paul mentions ers, in their assemblies in each part separately, viz., the speaking languages utterly unknown, in an unknown tongue (verse 13), “Let which, for want of an in- him pray that he may interpret." For terpreter, could be of no praying in an unknown tongue (verse edification to the rest of 14), " If I pray in an unknown tongue the faithful.

my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful." Singing (verse 15), “That it should be with the spirit and the understanding also." Blessing (verse 16), “So that he that occupieth the room of the unlearned may say, Amen." We certainly do not find mentioned, either prayer-books or missals, nor consequently the word Liturgy, but here, in this very chapter, is laid down the whole Church service as among the primitive Christians, and this practice in every separate part totally condemned ! Is not this “ wresting the Scriptures?"




Sacrament 4th.

Sacrament 4th.
Page 109.-Q. What do But where found the institution of


OF PENANCE, ETC., you mean by the sacrament penance? Certainly not in the holy of Penance?

Scriptures, the Christian's rule of faith A. An institution of and practice! for, as we shall hereafter Christ, by which our sins see, they are most decidedly opposed to are forgiven which we fall it; therefore, this “sacrament,” or instiinto after baptism.

tution, must be sought for in some other scriptures, as it has no place in the

Word of God! (18) Q. In what does (18) We undoubtedly cannot feel too this institution consist? much contrition ; but what satisfaction

A. On the part of the can guilty man render? Had not Christ penitent it consists in these alone made “full satisfaction for the sins three things, viz., contrition, of the whole world;" what I what must confession, and satisfaction, have been the doom of man? If full and on the part of the minise satisfaction is already made for believers ter in the absolution pro- in the efficacy of the atonement, why nounced by the authority would man seek to make farther satisof Jesus Christ. So that faction ? What is already complete, penance is a sacrament by perfect, entire, “ lacking nothing,” needs which the faithful that have no addition ! Could man's works of fallen into sins, confessing penance satisfy the justice of an offended the same with a true repent- God, then, surely, the Redeemer need ance, and a sincere purpose not have “ tasted death for every man.” of making satisfaction to See Acts iii. 19, “ Repent" (not “Do God, are absolved from their penance ! ”) and be converted, that your sins by the minister. sins may be blotted out when the times

of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;” in other words, “ blotted out,” not by the minister! himself also a sinner, but “the Lord.” St. Paul tells us, “ works do not justify, but

are the fruits of faith." (19) Q. Are Christians (19) Where do you find this nice disthen obliged to confess all tinction between mortal and venial sins their sins to the ministers of in Scripture ? “ We are all born in sin," Christ?

and all sin is hateful to God and punishA. They are obliged to able, or where is his justice? If we conconfess all such sins as are fess them all to God, to whom alone all mortal, or of which they are known," he will abundantly pardon;" have reason to doubt lest for in his sight there are no small or venial they may be mortal; but sins, or where is his purity ? May we they are not obliged to con- not, then, rest satisfied if God forgives 2 fess venial sins, because they St. John (1 John iii. 17) says, do not exclude eternally righteousness is sin," and since it is only from the kingdom of heaven, God's prerogative to forgive sin, “If we so there is not a strict obli- confess our sins (to God, not man,) he gation of having recourse is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, for the remission of them and to cleanse us from all unrighteousto the keys of the Church.

(20) Page 120. — Q. (20) Prove from Scripture this barter,

6 All un




OF PENANCE, ETC. Would it be a crime to this “ exchange," between “the mighty neglect the penance God” and his creatures, for I find it not satisfaction enjoined by the in the whole Bible! priest ?

While upon this subject, I will here A. Yes, it would; the advert to the erroneous and unscriptural more because we ought to doctrine works of supererogation. regard the penance enjoined Open your Bible, " For the Word that I as an exchange which God speak (says Christ) the same shall judge makes of the eternal punish- him at the last day!” “ Thou shalt love ment which we have deserved the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and by sin into these small peni- with all thy soul, and with all thy 'mind. tential works.

This is the first and great commandment.” “ And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” I will not here stop to prove that in your scheme this second commandment, which concerns man and man, invariably appears to take precedence of the first, which comprises man's duty to God! But I ask, can you, or I, or any man,—I do not except the patriarchs and apostles of old,

-lay his hand upon his heart and say, “I have done more than this comprehensive law requires ?I again ask, can we conscientiously, with the Word of God open before us, make such a declaration ? and, can we stand to it in the day of judgment ?

(To be continued.)



To the Editor of the Protestant Magazine. It appears to me desirable that the following conversation in the House of Commons in relation to the Irish Church should not pass unnoticed. The subject was brought forward by Mr. Stafford O'Brien, in consequence of an opinion said to have been expressed by the Earl of Lincoln, at the election for Nottinghamshire, which was considered satisfactory to a Whig-Radical elector, known to be no friend to the Irish Church. Mr. S. O'Brien alluded in his speech to the sentiments which had been declared by Lord John Russell in reference to this question. Sir James Graham took upon him to defend his noble friend, stating that he did not know that Lord John Russell entertained any sentiments unfriendly to the Irish Church. Now, Sir James Graham could not be ignorant that the Noble Lord had actually recommended in that House Vol. VIII.--April, 1816.

New Series, No. 4.


« PreviousContinue »