ERRORS OF ROME

Who Intercedes?
Sometime Minister of Whitebbey Presbyterian Church, N. Ireland
William Rogers M.A., L.L.D.

PART ONE
Hebrews 7:24,25

‘But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.’

Who intercedes? The Church of Rome teaches that we should apply to the Virgin Mary, or to other saints; that they should speak to God on our behalf; that we should appeal to saints to pray for us. But what need have we for other intercessors when we have Jesus the Son of God? In the matter of asking a favour, a great deal more depends on the person who asks for the favour than on any other consideration whatever.

What encouragement I find to faith in the fact that there is One who is using all His influences on my behalf, who is constantly asking favours for me; and this One is none other than the Only-Begotten, Well-Beloved Son.

Scripture links together the Son-ship of Christ and His intercession. In other words, the Lord would encourage us by impressing on us this fact, that it is the Son who is asking, is pleading on our behalf.

Hebrews 4:14,15:

‘Seeing then that we have a Great high Priest, that is passed into the Heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we have not an High Priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin’.

Let us boldly come unto the throne of Grace, for we have a Great High Priest – Jesus the Son.

Who has such influence with a father as a son, an only son?

Psalm 2:7,8:

‘The Lord hath said unto Me, Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee. Ask of Me, and I shall give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance, the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession’.

It is the Son who is to ask. ‘If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone?’ How much more if the Eternal Son, the Only Begotten ask? In the matter of asking a favour, a great deal more depends on the person who asks for the favour than on any other consideration whatever. What encouragement I find to faith, in this, that there is One who is using all His influence on my behalf, who is constantly asking favours for me, and this none other than the Only-Begotten, Well-Beloved Son of God!

Jacob prevailed. Elijah, a man of like passions with us, could shut and open Heaven. God encourages His Son to ask.

Solomon’s name was Jedidiah (Beloved of God) and He shows His love to him in this way, He bade him ask what He should give him.

The King told Esther whom he loved to ask, and promised it should be given her to the half of his Kingdom – but God keeps nothing back from His Son. He says, ‘Ask of me and I shall give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.’ He keeps back no part of His Kingdom. He ‘hath committed all judgement unto the Son’. No prayer of that Son was ever unanswered. Him the Father heareth always. He has only to express His wish – He can pray as no other ever could or dare. Even thus ‘Father, I will that they also whom thou hast given Me, be with Me where I am’. His slightest wish is a prevailing prayer.

By and bye we shall see what Jesus is working for us – Meantime, oh believer, take encouragement from this thought – Does it not help thee? That at this very moment, the Only Begotten Son of God, the well-beloved Son is engaged on thy behalf; appearing in God’s presence for thee, promoting thy full salvation.

‘If thou thoughtest thou had’st all the saints in heaven and earth jointly concurring in promoting thy salvation, and encouraged with God in instant and incessant prayers to save thee, how wouldst thou be encouraged? Shall I tell thee? One word out of Christ’s mouth would do more than all in Heaven and earth can do – and what is there then that we may not hope to obtain through His intercession?’ – Goodwin.

And now before we pass from this point, let us not carry away the impression that Jesus is pleading and that the Father is unwilling to grant what He asks for us.

Not so, Jesus himself says, ‘I say not unto you that I will pray to the Father for you, for the Father Himself loveth you’, that is, I need not tell you I will pray for you; of course I will – and yet I need hardly; for the Father Himself loves you and is disposed to give you, even apart from My asking.

The heart of David longed to go forth to Absalom. He was only waiting to find a reason for fetching home his banished. Hence when the wise woman of Tekoa pleaded for Absalom, she found the King just waiting to be gracious, longing to welcome the prodigal. So God’s heart goes forth to us and He welcomes the intercession of Christ and rejoices to bestow gifts on men, even the rebellious.

Who Intercedes? (Part 2)
Sometime Minister of Whitebbey Presbyterian Church, N. Ireland
William Rogers M.A., L.L.D.

PART TWO
Hebrews 7:24,25

‘But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.’

Who intercedes? There is nothing we value so much as the prayers of the Lord’s people. How it encourages and strengthens us if we know that a number of Christian people are making us the subjects of prayer! But the prayers of all the saints in heaven and earth would not be equal in value to one word of the Lord Jesus on our behalf. What encouragement, fellow-believers, we must draw from this – we have the prayers of the Lord Jesus on our behalf.

A minister once said, ‘The blessing of my life has been a praying mother’. Every Christian can go one farther than that and say, ‘The blessing of my life has been a praying saviour, One who continually makes intercession for me’.

The intercession of Christ – I don’t think we have been giving it its proper place.

The Importance of Christ’s Intercession.

1) We see this from the Old Testament priesthood.

As the Shorter Catechism teaches us, the priest has a twofold duty, a) to offer up sacrifices and b) to make intercession.

First he offered up a sacrifice to take away the sins of the people, but then he went into the presence of God as an intercessor to plead on behalf of the people. Now does not the fact that the offering up of the sacrifice was outside the Holy of Holies and the intercession within the Holy of Holies; and this other fact that while all the other priests, ordinary priests, might offer up sacrifice, yet the high priest alone could enter the Holy of Holies and make intercession – do not those two facts seem to imply that intercession was the more honourable part of the priestly office? And if so, is there not a danger not of our attaching too much value to Christ’s sacrifice for sin – for that would be impossible – but of our failing to give to His intercession that consideration and importance that are its due.

2) We see this from the way the Scriptures speak of it.

For example, Romans 8:34: ‘Who is He that condemeth? It is Christ that died, yea, rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.’ Let God’s people be full of confidence from this fact, Christ died, but there is a ‘yea, rather’, that is, there is something that brings them a stronger encouragement even than Christ’s death, that is His resurrection. But there is a fact more assuring and encouraging still, He is at the right hand of God, ‘who is even at the right hand of God.’ There yet remains the crown, the top-stone of all assurance in the intercession, ‘who also maketh intercession for us.’ In a word, the intercession of Christ, of all the facts, is that which fills the believer with fullest assurance, for it shows that not merely His Blood as seen in His death, nor the power as seen in His resurrection and ascension, but the Love of Christ as seen in His entreaties is employed on our behalf.

‘Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum; we have such an High Priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the Heavens’ ( Hebrews 8:1)

The Word ‘Sum’ means climax.

The chief point is this, that is, of the priesthood of Christ with which this epistle deals, the chief, the top of all is His intercession. Let us glory above all in this, we have a great High Priest who is passed into the Heavens to appear in the presence of God for us. Wherefore He is able to complete our salvation, not – He died, but seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for us.

3) From the Design of His Intercession.

He does not obtain redemption for us by His intercession. Before He entered Heaven, He had obtained redemption yes, ‘eternal redemption for us.’ ‘By His own blood, He entered in once into the Holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.’ His payment of our debt was in full. If He had come and died over again, He could have added nothing to the perfection of His redemption. What then is the value, the design of His intercession? This: by His intercession He puts us in possession of that redemption which His blood purchased for us; by His death He procures, by His intercession He applies redemption.

Here is an instance often given. On the cross He not only bore the sin of many, but He also made intercession for the transgressors. He prayed, ‘Father forgive them, for they know not what they do’; and by that prayer three thousand were converted on the day of Pentecost. His intercession secured the application of the redemption which His blood purchased to the very men who had taken and crucified and slain Him. How gloriously precious Christ's intercession, since through it we enter into the enjoyment of those blessings which He purchased by His Blood!
Who Intercedes? (Part 3)
Sometime Minister of Whitebbey Presbyterian Church, N. Ireland
William Rogers M.A., L.L.D.

PART THREE
Hebrews 7:24,25

‘But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.’

The Grounds of Christ’s Intercession. The Ground on which Christ asks (or intercedes) for blessings for us.

The high priest made it very plain on what ground He asked pardon and blessings for the people. Into the Holiest of all went the high priest, not without blood. He could not have gone without the blood. He could have asked nothing except on the ground of the shed blood. Let us see from two passages the ground of Christ’s intercession.

1. 1 John 2:1,2: ‘If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous. And he is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.’

His advocacy is based on His propitiation: that is, Christ died for our sins, paid our debt; and now He goes into the presence of God. He points to the full atonement, the perfect satisfaction which He rendered to God’s law, and on that ground He asks for us full pardon, our complete salvation. Are our sins never so many; never so weighty. Christ casts into the opposite scale of the balance, His sin-bearing, His atonement, His righteousness, and secures for ever our acquittal, our salvation.

The Lord Jesus is not asking anything for us that He does not furnish good grounds for our getting. No, He points to His obedience, suffering and death and He asks for us that we get the full value of His finished work.

2. Hebrews 12:24: ‘And to Jesus the Mediator of the New Covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaketh better things than that of Abel.’

All these words treat of Christ’s intercession.

In the ear of the Lord of Hosts, there is nothing that seems to utter so loud a cry as blood. Oh, how the blood, the blood stained knife, the blood stained garments appeal to Heaven against the murderer! As God said to Cain, ‘The voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto Me from the ground.’ The blood of Abel cried to God, cried for vengeance upon the head of Cain.

But we need ‘the blood of sprinkling that speaketh better things than that of Abel.’ Here again is blood that cries to God – what blood? The blood of Jesus Christ, Himself, the Great High Priest took into the very presence of God and sprinkled within Heaven itself on the Mercy-seat. There it lies, the blood of sprinkling.

The voice of that blood cries to God; but it does not cry like the blood of Abel for vengeance. But the blood calls for the pardon, the eternal life of all for whom it was shed. ‘The blood of sprinkling that speaketh better things than that of Abel.’ How effectual must the cry of this blood be when it is not the blood of an ordinary saint like Abel, but the blood of the King of saints – the Lord of glory; when it cries, not like Abel’s blood, from the ground, but from Heaven, where it lies, sprinkled on the very mercy-seat; and above all, when He that was dead is alive again, and lives for evermore to plead that the cry of His blood may be heard, and the greatest sinner who comes to Him may have a full and free and present salvation!

Fellow believer, ere we pass from this point, let me say this; the Lord hath done great things for us. He has bestowed on us great gifts – but sure I am of this – what we have received has come far short of the value of the blood of Christ. Now be encouraged by this thought – the Lord Jesus, by His intercession will put you and me into full possession of all the rich blessings His blood was able to purchase. Open thy mouth wide! Expect great blessings, far beyond anything you have ever got or thought of! For God’s gifts to thee shall be measured according to the value of the precious blood, and the very last farthing the blood of Christ could purchase for thee, shall be paid thee!
Who Intercedes? (Part 4)
Sometime Minister of Whitebbey Presbyterian Church, N. Ireland
William Rogers M.A., L.L.D.

PART FOUR
Hebrews 7:24,25

‘But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.’

For What does Christ Intercede? If we are absolutely certain to get everything that Jesus asks for us, and it must be so, for Him the Father heareth always, how interesting the enquiry – Can we find out what Jesus asks for?

His intercession in Heaven is just a continuation of His intercession on earth. This being so, we have no difficulty in finding out what He has set His heart on getting for us.

1) Forgiveness. Does He really, moment by moment, ask for me, forgiveness? Can you doubt it? He looks on that mob that crucified Him and He says, ‘Father forgive them’. How much more does the Lord Jesus ask forgiveness moment by moment for every one that looks to Him? When the wrath of God was kindled against Israel, Aaron took his censer and offered incense and the plague was stayed.

But Jesus expressly says, ‘If any man’ and child of God, ‘sin we have an Advocate with the Father’. That is just the moment I am sinning, that moment, Jesus, the Great High priest is saying, ‘Father, Forgive’

If I ask forgiveness, I may doubt I get it, but if with the eye of faith, I see Jesus asking it for me, I have got the blessing – Forgiveness is mine.

2) He asks for us faith. ‘Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you that he may sift you as wheat, but I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not.’

Many a timid one venturing on the Christian life is afraid to launch out into the deep, and says, ‘I fear I shall fall away, I am afraid of the temptations, I’ll not be able to keep it.’ Oh believer, knowest thou not thy standing in grace every moment is due to this, Jesus is every moment praying for thee?

Look up, oh believer, Jesus is praying for thee this moment, praying that thou mayest have faith, strong faith, increasing faith and shall not our faith grow exceedingly, for Him the Father heareth always.

3) He asks for our holiness. What is the burden of the prayer of Him who prays for us? Sanctify them through thy truth. The deepest desire of the heart of Jesus is that we may be holy, holy in thought and word and deed – this is the very keynote of His prayer.

When I look in, I feel discouraged. The heart seems to be growing harder and harder, viler and viler. But no prayer of Jesus ever failed. God will hear Him. God does this very evening hear Him. Therefore as I look up and hear the voice of Jesus praying that I may be purified and made holy, I know that even at this moment, grace is flowing into my soul and that stream will broaden and deepen until I shall be filled with that holiness without which no man shall see the Lord.

What bright prospects of present holiness the intercession of Christ opens to our view.

You can’t fail to get a blessing if you look to Jesus, your Great High Priest, who has set His heart upon your holiness.

4) Heaven. ‘Father, I will that they also, whom Thou hast given Me, be with Me where I am.’

We speak of the perseverance of the saints, meaning that a believer can never finally fall away. In other words that every one that believes in Jesus will at last be found in Heaven. But on what ground does this doctrine rest? On the perseverance of Christ. It is not so much the perseverance of the saint as the perseverance of Christ.

The believer is as sure of Heaven as if he were already there. Why? Because no one can be lost for whom Jesus prays, ‘Father I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with Me where I am.’

Timid, trembling, doubting believer, thou mayst safely, calmly leave thy case in the hands of Jesus. His prayer for thee is, ‘That you may be with Him where He is.’ And Him the Father heareth always.

5) Our Prayers. Revelation 8:3,4: ‘And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne. And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel’s hand.’

No prayer ever goes direct to God. It passes into the hands of Jesus. What is wrong in it, He corrects. If it is for God’s glory, He puts His name on the back of it. Now it is no longer my prayer, but the prayer of the Great High Priest, Him the Father heareth always. I find a wonderful encouragement to prayer, a wonderful assurance that prayer will be answered, in this truth: that Christ presents in His own name every prayer of mine, that is for God’s glory. I know that even now, whatever Jesus asks of God, God will give it Him. Christ prays for the Holy Spirit to be given us.

Believer, Christ spreads out before God thine every want, temptation, danger. Consider the Apostle and High Priest of thy profession, touched with a feeling of thine infirmities.

In prayer fix the eye on Christ’s intercession, a word from Him is more than all angels’ pleadings.

Surely thou wilt get a new departure in thy Christian life, thy heart will be enlarged with the expectations of such blessings as thou hast never yet experienced, if thou dost study the intercession of the Great High Priest, and keep looking to Jesus.

Who Intercedes? (Part 5)
Sometime Minister of Whitebbey Presbyterian Church, N. Ireland
William Rogers M.A., L.L.D.

PART FIVE
Hebrews 7:24,25

‘But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.’

When does Christ Intercede? Christ is doing as much work for us in Heaven, as ever He did for us on earth. Here suffering, but there, presenting His sufferings.

Scripture lays great stress on this, that Christ never for a moment ceases to plead on our behalf.

‘This man because He continueth ever hath an unchangeable priesthood.’ ‘He ever liveth to make intercession for them.’ How strong that language is! The one thing for which He lives, is, to pray!

He remains in Heaven as our Surety, on this condition, that He prays for us till He has us there.

I am afraid there are many who have asked us to pray for them, and we did for a time. But we grew weary and negligent and soon forgot to pray for them. (We don’t need to ask Him to pray.) But Christ hath not thus dealt with us. The moment has never been since first we trusted Him that we could say ‘Lord Jesus, Thou art not praying for me.’

Samuel ceased to pray for Saul. Moses’ hands got heavy in prayer and hung down, but not so the hands of our Great High Priest. Believer, what a help to faith thou wilt find every moment if thou wilt but take time to look up – take time to say, ‘Lord Jesus, at this very moment Thou art pleading for me; asking for my full enjoyment of all those gifts purchased by Thy blood.’

Hudson Taylor says he was brought to Christ by meditating on the words, ‘the finished work of Christ’, and he says, he found afterwards that at that very time his mother was praying for him. Every blessing that visits thy soul, thou mayst trace up to this: at that very time Jesus was praying for thee.
Who Intercedes? (Part 6)
Sometime Minister of Whitebbey Presbyterian Church, N. Ireland
William Rogers M.A., L.L.D.

PART SIX
Hebrews 7:24,25

‘But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.’

For Whom does Christ Intercede? Here is great encouragement to the poor sinner, to the discouraged believer. The Greek word for advocate signifies comforter. Will He take up my cause, will He plead for me? Blessed words: ‘He ever liveth to make intercession for them’ that come unto God by Him. Every word is full of blessing.

1. How am I to secure His Service? Just come. Believers are simply comers, such as go out of themselves rest not in their own works or righteousness; rest in nothing in themselves, but go out to God through Christ. To such he says, ‘Him that cometh to Me, I will in no wise cast out.’

2. How do we come? Come unto God by Him that is Christ. How plain the language is if we remember how under the Old Testament, one who had sinned was to go to God. He was to go by a priest who would make an atonement for his sin by a sacrifice. Now Christ is the Eternal High Priest, by whom we have access to the Father, that is, a leading by the hand. Dost thou not know how to come to God? Come to Christ who died for sinners. He will take thee by the hand and lead thee to God.

3. That Come for Salvation. Perhaps you fear it is not right for you to come to God, when you aim just at your own salvation. But it is. It is the errand on which you are to come. ‘He is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by Him.’ The Lord does not say He will do His uttermost to save you. No! he will save you to the uttermost. Notwithstanding all thy sins, thy temptations, all obstacles placed in thy way by the world, the flesh and the Devil, He will not give over – fail, nor be discouraged – till he has seen thee safe in the Father’s Heaven, saved to the uttermost. He will give grace and glory.

Our last question – Will Christ on my coming to Him take up at once my cause and begin to pray for me?

There are not more comfortable words in God’s book than these: ‘He ever liveth to make intercession.’

He lives on purpose to do this for sinners. It is the business of His life.

When a woman appealed to Philip, King of Macedonia for justice, and he put her off she said, ‘Then cease to be King.’ If Christ would once say ‘No,’ to a poor sinner who wanted Him to take his cause in hand, he must cease to be priest. But God appointed Him by an oath to this office, He ‘sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest forever.’

His constant calling in heaven is the salvation of poor sinners that will but come to Him. Come then, O sinner, entrust thy salvation to Jesus Christ. He never yet lost a soul committed to Him. Amen.
Monasteries And Convents
Written in the year 1886

As no means are being left untried once more to stud England with monasteries, it may be proper to glance at these institutions, and to inquire into their claims to the praise and confidence, or even toleration of society. On this subject we need not argue from principles to the consequence which may probably flow from them; history has supplied innumerable facts for the instruction of mankind. The thing is not now for the first time being introduced by way of experiment; that has long since been made over half the world, and everywhere with the same results. Monasteries and nunneries are based upon the erroneous principle-that in order to eminent holiness; a man must leave the world and withdraw into solitude, and there cultivate piety and walk with God.

To the simple and the sentimental there is a captivating plausibility about the idea which forms a snare into which multitudes have fallen. But it was not thus that the Son of God lived, nor thus that He commanded his Apostles to spend their days on earth after his departure. His people, He tells them, are the "salt of the earth;" but that salt may operate it must be brought into contact with the object; He tells them, they are the "lights of the world;" but if lights are to be of any use to mankind, they must not be placed in pits, or under bushels, in dens or caves of the earth. They might as well be put out at once for any practical purpose that can flow from them. Celibacy and solitude are follies of a kind very closely allied to sin. They are, in fact, a violation of principles laid deep in human nature, and of the express commands of the Word of God.

The principle of monasticism is a thing which admits of no rational defence, and if tested by its universal and uniform effects, it must be visited by the united and emphatic condemnation of the human race. To speak plainly, the proper definition of nunneries, of the ancient type, is dens of debauchery, caverns of crime-which carried the palm against all competition! They have been the haunts of hypocrisy, plague spots of society, schools preparatory for perdition! It is the policy of Rome to press her claims to any particular virtue, with vehemence proportioned to her consciousness of defect in that particular. In support of this, we shall produce a fact or two:

In the summer of 1835, a nunnery was opened in Edinburgh-the first there since the glorious Reformation-and on that occasion, Bishop Murdoch said, in the course of his sermon, "Scotland was once happy in her nunneries, monasteries, and convents, from whence issued a sweet odour of virtue, that attracted multitudes around to the faithful service of the world's Creator." It certainly required no common measure of brass to utter such language in the capital of Scotland. Either the Bishop had not read the History of Scotland, or he must have presumed that it was unknown to his auditors. The history of these institutions in Scotland, is one uniform stream of enormity; a chronicle of crimes at which even now, the virtuous reader turns pale! They had worked the utter ruin of virtue in Scotland, and filled society with an element of rottenness! The land was one huge moral charnel-house; the Reformation came just in time to save it from entire destruction!

The spread of these Institutions once more in England ought to be viewed with the deepest grief; and if they be allowed to exist at all, it should be under circumstances of supervision by the authorities, who may regulate, and, if needful, suppress them, and thus obviate the evils with which, in every land, they have hitherto abounded. The liberalism of our day is not without its dangers in this respect; it views all systems of professed Christianity as very much alike, and with the same indifference, if not contempt; and if the Protestant spirit of the British people prevent not, it will, before many years pass away, once more endow the Popish religion both in England and in Ireland, and at the same time extend it to the Colonies.

The bulk of the statesmen of the present day do not understand Popery and from this, their ignorance, arises their fearlessness, but it requires little sagacity to foretell the consequences of a courage that proceeds from blindness. Did they know it better, they would dread it more. The rise of monasticism is not to be viewed as a light matter; it very materially contributes to the coherence of the Papal system, and to nutriment it-a fact which explains the solicitude of the Popish clergy in England; to promote the reestablishment of these institutions. Composed, as such establishments are, they cannot fail to prove centres of influence wherever they are introduced. A prior, a sub-prior, a procurator, a prefect, and sub-prefect, a sacristan, and other officers, with a strong body of "brethren," form no inconsiderable citadel in a Protestant country.

Such monastic barracks become still more formidable, when it is remembered that they are all leagued indissolubly with the Pope of Rome; the general of every order of monks in the British Empire, residing at Rome, and receiving orders directly from the Pope and Propaganda. They are permitted to carry on whatever correspondence they please with Rome, with perfect secrecy; the British Government cares nothing about it; having no fears, it is heedless of safeguards. It is not so with the other chief Governments of Europe. Even the most thoroughly Papal States have been compelled to take the utmost precautions to protect themselves against the aggressive bearing of the Pope of Rome.

It is not so in England where the face of the country may be covered with monasteries and nunneries which the priests may manage as they think proper, holding with Rome whatever intercourse may conduce to the furtherance of their mysterious and mischievous projects. If the system, as far as this land is concerned do not prosper, the blame must lie with the priests themselves, and not with the British Government. We cannot breathe for our country a more patriotic wish than that the attempt to re-establish monasticism may not generally succeed; for if it do it will prove here again what it did in former times, and what it is now proving in every country where it exists-the ruin of morality and a heavy curse to society!

But already the progress is very great. No man that is conversant with the history of Popery in the world, can be unconcerned at the spread of these religious houses, in and around the metropolis, and throughout the provinces of England. Even since the Reformation, in countries where it is somewhat checked by the element of Protestantism, it is still a terrible evil; but it is only in countries where it is still pure and undiluted, as in Spain, that it is seen in its true character, in its frightful deformity.

In the days of our grandfathers, Rome, for example, comprised a population of 138568 with 40 bishops, 2686 priests, 3559 monks, 1814 nuns, with 393 servants-total, 8492 persons living out of the fruits of other people's industry! Thus 6285 clergy, secular and regular, were as one to every 22 persons in the population, exclusive of nuns! This, we conceive, it will be granted, is a tolerably fair supply of spiritual apparatus. Now the question is, its effects, moral and physical, on the population; and here we are not left in the dark, for history testifies that in both respects, the result was most deplorable.

The author of "Letters on Clerical Celibacy," on the authority of Ballaeus states that 6000 heads belonging to infants, the fruits of illicit intercourse, were found in a fishpond; this terrible statement has been the subject of some controversy. The result at which the late Mr. M`Gavin, the celebrated author of "The Protestant," arrived, was to the effect of its being, although scarcely credible, by no means impossible, since ten years in a marshy place, not influenced by the weather, comprising 600 a year, would make up the number. (Acta Rom. Pont.," 46. 11 The Protestant;, Vol. iv. 195) Be this as it may, that infanticide prevailed to an extent the most awful, is a matter of indubitable certainty. In our own day, with a population of 131256, Rome had 1013 children exposed in a single year, which was nearly three every night, upon an average-a number which, supposing they had been thrown dead into a marsh, instead of being brought to the Foundling Hospital, would have made up the total number aforesaid in less than ten years.

So late as the 25th of last January, a gentleman writes to a London journal of great repute, as follows:—"In your paper of the 17th you have inserted a letter from ` C. F.,' relative to a strange occurrence, in 1829, at Charenton-sur-Marne. May I be allowed to state that your correspondent has made a mistake as to the locality? It should have been at Charenton-sur-Seine, near Paris. I was engaged on the works of Messrs. Manby and Wilson, under Mr. Holroyd, the engineer of the works, when time after time large numbers of infant skeletons were discovered in all parts of the premises, which, I believe, had been, a convent of a very strict order of nuns. At first we did not take much notice of the circumstance; but when the attention of Mr. Holroyd and Mr. Armstrong was called to the singular affair, we were directed to count the remains; and from that day we counted, and placed to one side, no less than 387 entire skeletons of infants. We took no account of parts of skeletons, which if they had been all put together, would have far outnumbered the entire ones which were counted. I speak far within bounds when I say that there were found not fewer than the remains of 800 children, and there was not a single bone of an adult person among them. The mayor came to the premises, and had the bones placed in boxes and privately buried in the cemetery, and orders were given to hush up the affair."

When the hidden things of darkness come to be revealed, and not till then, the iniquities of Popery will be displayed in all the length and breadth, height and depth of their enormity, to the wonder of angels, and the horror of the spirits of just men made perfect!

On this subject the famous Echert and Augustodinus are unexceptionable witnesses of what was passing before their own eyes. The former of these says, "I have inspected the churches of the clergy and have found in them great and endless enormities. I have seen the cloisters of nuns, which I cannot call by any more tender name, than the snare of the devil, and lo! an alien has laid waste all; the lillies of chastity are burned up, and woeful destruction is everywhere conspicuous throughout the whole world of souls."

The latter says, "Look at the nunneries, and you will see in them a chamber already for the beast! There the nuns, from a tender age, learn lewdness, and associate very many companions with themselves, to heap up greater damnation; or else endeavour to keep out of sight, that they may be able yet more to let loose the reins of licentiousness. They are worse than common prostitutes, and like an insatiable whirlpool, can never be satisfied with the filth of their uncleanness! They snare the souls of young men, and rejoice if they ensnare many; and she expects the palm of victory who surpasses the rest in crimes." This is a text for Dr. Manning the next time he taunts the hierarchy of England on the subject of the doings of his Church for the poor, and of his own intended performances, through the rising monasteries and nunneries on behalf of the poor of the Metropolis.

We cannot leave this dreadful subject without adding the testimony of Wolfius, to the following effect:—"The nuns only remain for me to carry my description according to promise, from the head down to the feet, without omitting any order. But of these, modesty forbids me to say more, lest we should make a long and disgusting discourse, not concerning virgins dedicated to God, but rather of houses of ill-fame, of the acts of lasciviousness of harlots, of defilements and incest! For what else, I ask you, are the nunneries in the present day but execrable brothels of Venus, rather than sanctuaries of God, and houses of resort for lascivious and filthy gallants to satiate their lusts? So that now for a nun to take the veil, is to expose herself to public prostitution."

Let the people of England ponder these facts. We recoil from the statement, and, perhaps, it may wound the feelings of many a pure heart whose eye may fall upon it. But the truth must be spoken. These are not times to permit the sacrifice of that to false delicacy. It must be spoken and we will speak it, impugn it "whoso listeth."

In France, at the close of the last century, there were 18 Archbishops, 109 Bishops, 16 heads of religious houses, 556 Abbayes of Nuns, 1356 of Monks, 700 Convents of Cordeliers, 1240 Priors, 15200 chapels, about 34441 parishes, 14077 convents of all orders, 122600 Monks, 82000 Nuns; the total of Monks and Nuns 204600, with revenues amounting to £26000000. Here, too, is a fair supply; if ever Popery was in a position to make a full experiment upon a great people, it was in this case, since nearly the half of the whole land in France was in possession of the Church. The question then, to be put is, what was the effect of this prodigious array of spiritual force? Was the land a Goshen of piety, a paradise of innocence? Much otherwise! It is the unanimous testimony of all truthful history, that society was corrupt at its very core? But not to lose ourselves in generals, we shall cite the great historian of Europe, Mr Sheriff Allison, who declares that "the dissoluton of manners was enormous. Twenty millions of the public debt at the time of the Revolution, had been incurred for expenses too ignominious to bear the light, or ever to be named, in the public accounts." No marvel that a revolution arose; or that Voltaire denounced the Christianity, so called, which he saw around him.

But what was the effect of this all-pervading flood of Popery on the condition of the people? According to an excellent authority, Mr. Arthur Young, "labour was 76 per cent. cheaper in France than in England," a tolerably fair index to the physical influence of Popery and Protestantism respectively. Mr. Young, indeed, says,—"It reminded him of the miseries of Ireland." In this, as in everything else, the same causes never fail to produce the same effects. We might proceed to Spain and other countries, where we should find a state of things precisely similar; ignorance, idleness, poverty, misery, immorality prevailed in enact proportion to the prevalence of Popery.

But after the manifestoes of Bishop Murdoch and Cardinal Wiseman, it may be well to look at home, and enquire into the effects of Romanism at the present time. Cardinal Wiseman boasted of the wonders it has performed for the poor, and of the

great things that he had to do for Southwark. Now let us look at facts-facts obtained from the highest authority. The Parliamentary report on the poor, for the year 1830, states that 60000 persons in one year passed through the fever hospitals of Dublin a city not much larger than Glasgow. In the latter city-thoroughly Protestant, until polluted by Irish Papal emigration, by no means healthily situated, nor remarkable, but the contrary, for its sanitary regulations-so many patients did not pass through the Glasgow infirmary, for all sorts of maladies united, from the year 1794 to the year 1834, as did in Dublin for fever alone, arising from filth and squalor among the Popish populace for a single year!

But what of crime? The following may suffice for an illustration:—"In 1833, Lord Althorp stated to the Commons, that there were 4805 crimes by parties bound by oath in one province, and 163 of these murders. Sir Hussey Vivian's Returns in 1832 gave in all Ireland, from the military stations 1037; from Protestant Ulster, the largest of four provinces, 14! Returns from public prisons in 1819, 1820 in 1819 in the Adult Female Penitentiary, 56 -Roman Catholics 53; Protestants, 3. In the Penitentiary for Young Criminals, 105- Roman Catholics 96; Protestants 9. In 1819, convict ship, ` Benevolence,' from Cove of Cork to New South Wales, with 153 convicts-146 Roman Catholics; Protestants, 4. In March 1820, ` Hudlaw,' Captain Cragie, convict-Roman Catholics, 147; Protestants, 3. The proportion is nearly as four to one." We do not overlook the difference of the relative numbers of the two classes in the country.

Is it true respecting religious systems, as of trees and men, "by their fruits we shall know them?" To what conclusion, then, shall we come with respect to Popery, as in actual operation before our eyes? Let it not be said that Irish crime is the result of Irish poverty, until it has been first proved that Irish poverty is not the result of Irish Popery. But we invite the objector to the Continent, and challenge him to an investigation of the statistics of crime there. What is the testimony of the President of the Tribune of Mayence? It is, that the number of malefactors in Popish and Protestant countries, is in the proportion of four, if not six, to one! At Augsburg, with a mixed population, the convicted malefactors were as five Catholics to one Protestant, taking the population, of course, at thousand per thousand. What said our own immortal Howard, the philanthropist, respecting the comparative state of crime in Protestant and Popish countries in his day? He had tested that in Italy the prisons were always crowded, as also at Venice and Naples, while in Berne, the Protestant Canton, they were always empty, and that at Lausanne, he found no prisoner, and only three individuals in a state of arrest, at Schaffhausen. These are facts which we commend to the advocates of Popery as the chief source of morality and order.

As to social comfort, the same principle is found everywhere to prevail. In a lecture of the Rev. Thomas Gibson, delivered at Glasgow, which we select as a period when Popery in Ireland had not been weakened by emigration or other causes, we have a comparative view of Scotland and Ireland: "Scotland, a poor soil, 2333000 inhabitants; Ireland, a rich soil, with eight millions of people.

Cotton factories. Scotland 159 Ireland 28
Wool ditto Scotland 90 Ireland 36
Silk ditto Scotland 6 Ireland 1
Flax ditto Scotland 170 Ireland 35
(Flax is a staple article of Ireland.)

"The post office of Scotland yielded a gross produce of £205276; Ireland, £240471; but observe that the net produce of Scotland was £135806, of Ireland, £130497. The cities and towns bore a like proportion. To what is this owing? To irreligion and turbulence."

Mr. Gibson himself testifies to what ho found in travelling over the Continent; and says he had no difficulty in a moment, in ascertaining as he passed from country to country, whether he was among Papists or Protestants. The fact appeared on the very face of society. He further observed, that civilization and social comfort rose and fell exactly in the degree in which Popery was intense, or more relaxed. The conclusion, at which he arrived, was that everywhere " Popery, slavery, poverty, squalor, and filth, kept pace with one another. The riot, folly, and excess, licentiousness of the carnival, the multitude of processions, idle shows, and runs for months together after them, and false miracles, was destructive to morality, order, and prosperity. The whole is a vast scheme to elevate the supreme dominion of a host of priests, at the expense of the universal slavery, poverty, and degradation of mankind."

Reader! Such is a glimpse at the system, and we now appeal to you whether you can look upon it as a system that deserves to be viewed with favour by the friends of mankind? Can it be congruous with that religion which was heralded by angels, as fraught with " peace on earth, and goodwill to men?" Can it be justly looked upon as anything other than one of the worst elements of that mighty conspiracy against the human race, known as Popery? Had Popery nothing else evil in it but this conventual system, should not that alone suffice to call forth a unanimous shout of execration from the whole human family, followed by endeavours, intense and resolute, at its utter extirpation? It will subsequently appear, that Popish convents are fearfully on the increase throughout Great Britain.
Holy Orders
On the subject of Holy Orders, as on every other, our watchword must be to the law and to the testimony. What is written? How readest thou?
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

HOLY ORDERS is an expression altogether unknown to the Sacred Scriptures, and the thing it represents would have been not less a novelty to the Apostles themselves and their disciples. Popery has assigned to it a very significant import, and clothed it with the honour of a sacrament; consequently claiming for it divine institution, a visible sign and promised grace. Like everything else in the perversions of Popery, the object here was clearly to exalt the priesthood, and to cut off all sorts of lay agency in matters appertaining to religion. The terms in which they speak of the matter are quite extraordinary. According to the Council of Trent "As the ministry of so exalted a priesthood is a divine thing, it was meet, in order to surround it with the greater dignity and veneration, that there should be several distinct Orders of ministers, intended by their office to serve the priesthood, and so disposed, as that beginning with the clerical treasure, they may ascend gradually through the lesser to the greater Orders." The gradation runs thus: "porter, reader, exorcist, acolite, sub-deacon, deacon, and priest "distinctions utterly unknown to the Scriptures. As to the outward sign claimed for a sacrament, there was such in the imposition of hands, but as to the inward grace, the thing is without foundation in Scripture, and wholly inconsistent with fact; since neither amongst Papists nor Protestants, has there ever been any ascertained connection between such imposition and the bestowment of grace, or the Holy Ghost. The Council of Trent, however, nothing daunted, declares that by " Holy Ordination, bestowed by words and external signs, grace is conferred, and that none ought to doubt that Orders constitute one of the Seven Sacraments of the Holy Church." These conclusions are, as usual, fortified by anathema.

The Christian Ministry is an institution, but not a sacrament. Examination of the Holy Scriptures shows, that it consisted of bishops or pastors, or elders, or ministers-varied names for the same class -whose functions consisted in teaching and in rule; and of the deacons, whose special business it was to superintend the affairs of the Church with reference to the poor, and who appear also to have been men of eminent spirituality, and who gave themselves to promote the salvation of men through the preaching of the Gospel.

This point stands intimately related to a subject of which we have in recent years heard so much Apostolic Succession. Although some branches of the Protestant Church make much of this succession, it is in vain that we look to the Holy Scriptures for anything to support the assumption. There is a broad line of distinction drawn between the Apostles and all other ministers of the Gospel, so that to allege Succession is simply to practice imposition. The Apostles were men who had seen the Lord, and received a commission from his own mouth to go and publish salvation to the ends of the earth, with the promise of His presence till their work was done. We maintain that there was no succession, and nothing bearing the remotest relation to it. We call upon those that claim to be the Successors of the Apostles to produce their authority. We beg to remind them, that the Commission of the Apostles died with them, and so did the special powers, which constituted their credentials.

On the subject of Holy Orders, as on every other, our watchword must be to the law and to the testimony. What is written? How readest thou? This is the short and the sure way to put an end to all Popish pretension on the subject of Holy Orders and Apostolic succession, whether found in Rome or in regions where better things might be expected.

Among the votaries of Rome, Apostolical succession means this-all the Popish Priests now on the earth, have been ordained by bishops; all the bishops now on the earth, have been chosen by the Pope, and episcopally ordained by his authority. The present Pope is held to be the last of a series ending in Peter the Apostle; while it is affirmed that Peter received his chair and his powers direct from Christ, and bequeathed them to his immediate successor, and he to his, and that thus they have been transmitted to our times. Such is the theory; and hence it is said that a Popish priest, on entering his fold, may thus address his flock: -- The Word of God which I announce to you, and the holy sacraments which I dispense to you, I am QUALIFIED to announce and dispense by such a Catholic bishop, who was consecrated by such another Catholic bishop, and so on, in a series which reaches to the Apostles themselves; and I am AUTHORIZED to preach and minister to you by such a prelate, who received authority for this purpose from the successors of St. Peter in the Apostolic See of Rome." (Milner, Letter xxix.) This at once exemplifies Apostolical Succession and Papal Unity. The Puseyites adopt the same principles, and apply it to the ministry of the Church of England. The whole of the inferior clergy have been ordained by the laying on of the hands of bishops, and all the bishops have been ordained by those who were bishops before them; and thus the line, it is contended, may be traced back to the times which preceded the Reformation, when the Church of England was a portion of the Catholic Church, in subjection to the Pope, and in communion with Rome.

All this might be suffered to pass without fear or notice, did it not involve practical principles of the highest moment and the most fearful consequences. With a view to the illustration of these, we shall now adduce a series of testimonies demonstrative of identity of Popery and Puseyism, and the essentially wicked and persecuting character of both systems.

1. The only ministration to which the Lord has promised his presence, is to that of the bishops, who are successors of the first commissioned Apostles, and the other clergy acting under their sanction and by their authority. '(Hook's Sermon on the Established Church) The sacrament of the Lord's Supper can only be administered by ministers duly ordained, and, therefore, it is needful to continue in a Church possessing an Apostolical Succession. (Hook's Sermon on Training)

2. The gift of the Holy Ghost has been preserved in the world solely by means of the Episcopal succession; and to seek communion with Christ by any other channel, is to attempt an impossibility. (Preface to Fronde's Remains)

3. No congregation, not being under this form of government, can be a true branch of Christ's holy Catholic Church. The clergy of the Church, and they alone, are entitled to the respect and obedience of the people, as their lawful guides and governors in spiritual things; that they alone are duly commissioned to preach the Word of God, and to administer the holy sacrament. (Bishop of London's Charges)

4. It is only this (Apostolical Succession) that can give any security that the ministration of the word and sacraments shall be effectual to the saving of souls. The Dissenters have it not. (Tract xxxv)

5. I should like to know why you flinch from saying, that the power of making the body aid blood of Christ is vested in the successors of the Apostles. (Fronde, vol. 1. p. 326)

6. The day may come when each of us, inferior ministers, may have to give up our churches, and be among you in no better temporal circumstances than yourselves; then you will honour us with a purer honour than you do now-namely, as those who are entrusted with the keys of heaven and hell, as entrusted with the awful and mysterious gift of making the bread. and wine, Christ's body and blood.' (Tract x. p. 4)

7. The power claimed by the Church is a vast power, which places it almost upon a level with God himself the power of forgiving sins by wiping them out in baptism-of transferring souls from hell to heaven-the power of bringing down the Spirit of God, and of incorporating it in the persons of frail and fleshly man. (Sewell, p. 247)

Now we affirm, without fear of Scriptural contradiction, that the doctrine here set forth is wholly unsupported by the Word of God, and opposed to the whole current of inspiration. It assumes as truth what has no foundation whatever in fact. It assumes as fact a palpable absurdity.

Granting that Peter was the first Roman bishop and pope, and that the succession really commenced, enough has occurred a thousand times over to invalidate its orders, and extinguish the fire of heaven supposed to run through the Apostolic line. In order to the continuance of the Divine authority, the spiritual power, and the sacramental efficacy, it is required that every line of the mystic chain shall be pure gold, and that not a link shall be wanting; for a single mistake, like an error in an arithmetical computation, will run through all that follows, rendering it null and void. A single error will vitiate the entire line. The Puseyites feel the force of this; and hence Dr. Hook sends forth, with our last citation, another of Dr. Pusey's "courageous avowals:' "Our ordinations," says he, "descend, in an unbroken line, from Peter and Paul, the Apostles of the Circumcision and the Gentiles."

To deal effectually with this point, it is needful to inquire whether the " line " can be broken; and if so, by what forces? If it cannot be broken, there is an end of argument. If, according to Archdeacon Mason, (Defence of the Church of England Ministry) neither " degradation," nor " heresy," nor " schism," nor " the most extreme wickedness," nor " anything else," can divest a bishop of the power of giving trite orders, then of course the chain is strong, and all the powers of darkness cannot break it. If, according to the Puseyites, "the sacraments, not preaching, are the source of Divine grace," and if the efficacy of these is wholly "independent of the personal character of the administrator," (Tracts, Preface, 1834, No. xi.) and if it is enough that he has been episcopally ordained, then the matter is much simplified, but not strengthened; for while the utmost depravity of character, and the most impious heresy of doctrine, may, in Popish esteem, be trifling matters, yet, if a single link of the Papal chain shall be snapped, it falls asunder, and it cannot be again united. But nothing in history is more certain than that this chain has been constantly broken, in all possible ways, at one time through the electors, at another through the elected. For centuries the popes were created by the authority of the emperors, and the objects of their choice were generally anti-popes or schismatics; and popes were often made by means still more questionable. But the dreadful tale must not be told by Protestant lips, lest they should be charged with colouring. Let Baronius, therefore, speak, himself a cardinal, and one of the greatest of men. Referring to the ninth century, he exclaims, " Oh! what was then the face of the holy Roman Church? How filthy, when the vilest and most powerful harlots ruled in the court of Rome! -By whose arbitrary sway dioceses were made and unmade, bishops were consecrated, and, horrible to be mentioned, false popes, their paramours, were thrust into the Chair of Peter, who in being numbered as popes, serve no purpose except to fill up the catalogue of the Popes of Rome! For who can say, that persons thrust into the Popedom, without any law, by harlots of this sort, were legitimate Popes of Rome? In the elections no mention is made of the acts of the clergy, either by their choosing the Pope, at the time of his election, or their consent afterwards. All the canons were suppressed into silence-the voice of the decrees of former pontiffs was not allowed to be heard-ancient traditions were proscribed-the customs formerly practised in electing the Pope, with the sacred rites and pristine usages, were all extinguished. In this manner, lust, supported by secular power, excited to frenzy in the rage for domination, ruled in all things: (Baronius) Time would fail to tell of Pope Sergius and his crimes; of Theodora and Marozia, and the Papal profligates by whose iniquitous attentions they were signalized; of thirteen schisms in the Popedom during a century and a half, when rival popes, each pretending to represent Peter, contended for his chair, when popes excommunicated popes, when popes with popes waged mortal war, and when both have been removed and expelled;-of Pope Joan, the most abandoned of womankind, whom vengeance overtook, and whose turpitude was proclaimed in the streets of Rome at noonday; of Pope John XIII., transfixed with a dagger in the perpetration of an atrocious crime; of Alexander VI., who would have carried away the crown of sin from the men of Sodom! Teachers, Englishmen, Protestants! -Behold the UNBROKEN CHAIN OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION!

O! Sacred Truth! Is it needful to waste another word on a system so revolting, so monstrous? Let Sewell and Seager, Hook and Pusey, and all who boast in it, enjoy all their honours, without envy and without molestation; but let them learn to do at least a slender homage to the majesty of truth, and pay some regard to the common sense of mankind! Let them cease to heap the collected filth of the universe on the pure vineyard of the Lord, and to insult the God of Heaven with impieties, by which even Hell itself is filled with astonishment! Is this the channel through which the Church of England has received her orders, and the special gift of the Holy Spirit? Is it thence she derives her "right to be sure that her clergy have the real body and blood of Christ to give to the people?" Is this the ground of the proud contempt with which many of her sons look down upon the ministry of all Christians of all countries that have not drunk of this dark Tartarean stream? Is this the " sole means by which the Holy Ghost has been preserved in the world?" Oh! matchless impiety! Compared with this blasphemy, all other blasphemy is devotion!

Is this the ground of " the security " given by the Puseyites, that their "ministrations of the word and sacraments shall be effectual to the saving of souls, while the Dissenting teachers have it not?" So sure as there is truth in God, grace in Christ, and purity in the Eternal Spirit, the author of this doctrine is the " Father of Lies," Abaddon, Apollyon, the Destroyer of Men!

The true doctrine of the Apostolic Succession may briefly and yet conclusively be stated: -While we reject with indignation the Popish and Puseyite doctrine of Apostolical Succession, and denounce at once its origin and character, we have charges of the gravest kind to urge against it, as an instrument of boundless mischief to the kingdom of Christ. Before these are announced, however, it is proper to state the true doctrine of the New Testament on the subject. The Apostles then, as such, had, and they could have had, no successors! but the bishops ordained over the Churches, which the Apostles and their coadjutors formed, had successors. This is the true Apostolic Succession; -the succession of the bishops whom the Apostles themselves appointed. Everything added to this is a needless supplement; everything subversive of this is arrogant impiety. As this is a matter on which great explicitness was necessary, so the Apostle, as might be expected, has been more full and more precise upon this point than upon any other connected with the New Testament Kingdom. About ordination as an act, he says but three words; of character, doctrine, and aptness to teach, he speaks with emphatic and solemn iteration. Paul, indeed, knew nothing of the things called " Deacon's Orders " and " Priest's Orders," as such things exist in the Church of England. With these things, and many others of which Rome and her daughters boast, Paul had no acquaintance. Archbishops, diocesan bishops, and a clergy, as contradistinguished from bishops, a clergy comprising priests, deacons, archdeacons, deans, rural deans, prebends, canons, curates, vicars, rectors, some " working,'' others idle, the latter laden with wealth, the former pining with poverty, in all cases the recompense being in the inverse proportion of the toil -these were perfections to which the rude ecclesiastical polity of the Apostolical Age had not attained. The Apostles appointed only one class of spiritual officers, designated pastors, presbyters, elders, bishops. These terms were convertible; it mattered not which were used. All were bishops, none less, none more.

1. Character was the first point of inquiry in the appointment of bishops.

The foundation of that character was the knowledge and love of God, displayed in moral excellence. "A bishop must be blameless, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality: not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; patient, not a brawler, not covetous; not a novice; one that rules well his own house; a lover of good men; just, holy, temperate, bearing a good report of them that are without." (1 Tim, III. 1-7; Titus 1. 5-8) In the absence of this high personal character, no knowledge, no gifts sufficed to fit a man for the episcopal office. The bishop was to be, in all points, a striking pattern of the doctrines he was to teach. He was not to speak from hearsay, but from experience. There were in those "barbarous tunes " for the cripple no crutches; there was no Liturgy for bishops who could not pray-no homilies for bishops who could not preach; they required both to pray and preach from the abundance of the heart. They believed, and therefore they spake, that which they had seen with their eyes, which their hands had handled, of the Word of Life; that which they had seen and heard, they declared to men. (1 John I 1-3.)

Here then we call upon the Puseyite teachers of our times to come forth, and stand their trial before the bar of inspiration! How comes it, that while the very heavens echo and re-echo the cry of succession, the silence of death prevails upon the subject of conversion? Is it because, to a person baptized by one of the succession, the party is already regenerate? The assumption we deny, and demand proof. The Puseyites tell us their mind with much freedom; and it is, therefore, only proper that we exercise the like frankness. The whole fabric is of the earth, and earthy. Beginning with the extremities, the probabilities of corruption and carnality increase at every remove till we reach the head. The bill which annexed the supremacy of the Church to the crown of Elizabeth, determined for ever the character of the bulk of the bishops and the clergy. By this act, the Sovereign of England was vested with the whole spiritual power: it was thenceforward competent for the Crown to make, or to unmake; to repress whatever it might deem heresy, or uphold whatever it might deem orthodoxy; to repeal or enact canons; to alter or annihilate discipline; to institute or abolish rites and ceremonies. This act, even Hume himself being judge, " at once gave the Crown alone all the power which had formerly been claimed by the popes; but which even these usurping prelates have never been able fully to exercise, without some concurrence."(Hume, chap. XXVIII) Here is a weighty truth, worthy of Puseyite meditation. The head of the nation is the head of their Church. This arrangement is, no doubt, very Apostolic! But let them ponder the facts that flow from it.

We ask them, is not this your Church's head, the fountain of its life? Are not the chances of intelligent, consistent piety, in that head, as one against millions? There, then, is your head! And should that head be a Borgias, or a Cataline, a negation of all virtues, an impersonation of all vices, diffusing poison and death through the whole body ecclesiastical, there is no remedy! Has not the head the appointment of all the bishops? Does not the character of the Crown modified perhaps, by the minister of the day, determine the character of such elections? Does any consideration; can any consideration, other than that of political interest, as a rule, regulate such appointments? In your consciences, do you believe that the New Testament rule of qualification is that by which their fitness is determined? In your consciences, do you believe that Timothy, acting under Paul's instructions, would have ordained, over a primitive church, one in a number of those who have been made bishops of the English Church since the times of Elizabeth? The first step of the gentlemen, in their ascent to the episcopal throne, is their choice and appointment by the Crown. There can be no doubt, of course, that thus it was with the Apostles, with the bishops of Ephesus, and all the other bishops of the Apostolic Age! There can be no question, also, that the immediate successor of Peter at Rome was chosen and appointed by the Emperor previous to his ordination to the Bishopric of the World! Here all is congruity, order, and beauty! All is perfect harmony with the New Testament example! The consecration, too, is to be in full keeping with the other parts. The dean and chapter have twelve days given them to inquiry into the character of the person nominated; and if they fail to elect within this time, election becomes unnecessary, and the Crown presents without it. The dean and chapter have eight days, and the archbishop twenty; and if the former fails to perform the farce of election, and the latter to consecrate, a praemunire follows, all their goods, ecclesiastical and personal, are liable to confiscation, and themselves to imprisonment till such time as they submit! (See Tracts for the Times, No. lix) surely nothing more can be necessary to stamp the truly Apostolic character of the bishops of the Church of England

Now for the numberless little links suspended from the Apostolic chain. Of the twelve thousand parishes of England and Wales, by far the greater number are in the gift of men wholly irresponsible to man, and who may feel no responsibility to God. The Prime Minister and the Lord Chancellor, likewise, have both a large amount of patronage. Now, these patrons may all be, and a very great majority of them, from age to age, have always been, mere men of the world-men who have no fear of God before their eyes. Well, in making the auxiliary links of the Apostolic chain, the first step in the process belongs to that motley multitude. With them, as a body, it lies to say who shall, and who shall not, be the spiritual guides of thousands and thousands of parishes, and millions of people! Can it be doubted, that they proceed in making parsons just as the Crown does in making prelates. In making their choice of men to enjoy their respective livings, do you believe they go about the work in the fear of God, with a constant view to the qualifications set forth by Paul in his letters to Timothy and Titus? Would not the clear possession of such qualifications be an insuperable objection to the appointment, with an immense majority of such patrons? In cases innumerable, have not the gifts of such livings been the wages of iniquity? Have not thousands and tens of thousands been thus thrust into the ministry, who possessed not one of the qualifications demanded by the Word of God? All this, to be sure, is very Apostolic!

But that these gentlemen may enjoy the comfort of their lot, they must be formed into the regular line of succession, by the imposition of episcopal hands. Now comes the mystery. The day arrives; the services and ceremonies connected therewith are performed; hands are laid on the presentee, and from that moment he becomes another man. He now sustains another character, and is investe with supernatural powers! Special authority has descended on him; special virtue has entered into him. Considered as a moral being, he is not more pure! as an intellectual being he is not more knowing; he is as much a man of the world, and the slave of his passions, as ever; but he is now a successor-of the Apostle! He may sport care away, dance, hunt, play, swear, and revel; still he is in orders-he is a link of the chain, and all his deeds ministerial are valid! He can regenerate children, absolve adults, make the bread and wine into the body and blood of the Lord, and other deeds peculiar to the succession! Personal piety is, for official purposes, quite unnecessary. Matters go on quite as well without it. But suppose a bishop to have some scruples of conscience; of course, he can withhold ordination. He can; but it is at his peril that he does so. Unless he can prove to the satisfaction of a jury, in a court of common law, that the person presented to him for institution has been guilty of some particular immoral act, or maintains some heretical opinion, he loses his cause, and must ordain; and if he persist, he is liable to an action for damages. All this to be sure is very Apostolic! Our Apostolic successors, both bishops and clergy, are and ever have been chosen, to an awful extent, out of the ranks of ungodly men, by the good pleasure of ungodly men; and they have lived a life agreeably to the course of an ungodly world! From such a succession may God, in mercy, speedily deliver this and all other countries!

2. Doctrine was the second point of inquiry in the appointment of bishops.

The Apostles said nothing of succession, but much of character; they rarely mentioned sacraments, but they discoursed continually of doctrine. Doctrine was the grand instrument with which they reformed the world. Paul thus counsels Timothy:- The things that thou hast heard of me, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also." He tells Titus to ordain only such men as "held fast the faithful Word as they had been taught," that they might "be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers." Hear John:-" Whosoever abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, bath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he bath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God-speed; for he that biddeth him God-speed, is partaker of his evil deeds:' No matter whence men came, or to what class they belonged, if they did not bring the true Gospel in their mouths, they were at once to be rejected. This rule applied to all such, whether men or angels. "Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed! " In the Apostles' own days, doctrine was not everything; nor did its intrinsic importance ever after become diminished. The doctrine of Christ crucified was the power of God to the salvation of man. This doctrine was the great restorative to life, health, and happiness for a diseased world.

These are facts; and here, again, we call on Papist and Puseyite teachers to stand forth and defend their systems! To such teachers, we say, How came you to lay down the principle, that " the sacraments, not preaching, are the sources of Divine grace?" How came you to say, "That in Scripture, all the words denoting a minister of the Gospel, designate him as one ministering or serving at God's altar, not as one whose first object is to be useful to men?" How came you to say, "Usefulness to men is only a secondary object?" Was it that you might console the impotent portion of your number by the declaration-" We need not feel either guilt or shame, though we should be like those whom the Prophet calls, ` dumb dogs that cannot bark?"(Tract lxxxvii) What! successors of the Apostles, who can neither preach nor pray without book! Even if there were no guilt, should there not be some shame, in such a case? Was it thus with the Apostles? What! you endowed with gifts so precious, invested with powers, which, in your own phrase, " place you almost upon a level with God himself,"-and yet cannot pray and preach! Oh, it cannot be! Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. Your case, however, is not new; your predecessors in proscription, your prototypes in presumption, the Prophets of the Jewish succession, when they had uttered much folly, not a little falsehood, and committed a great deal of iniquity, retained an inexhaustible stock of both confidence and complacency. Hear Jeremiah's account of them: -" Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? Nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush: therefore shall they fall among them that fall; in the time of their visitation, they shall be cast down, with the Lord."

Again: we ask. How came you so to trifle with the truth of God as to utter the following words?" We would not be thought entirely to depreciate preaching, as a mode of doing good; it maybe necessary in a weak and languishing state; but it is an instrument which Scripture, to say the least, has never much recommended."(Tract lxxxix) Is it, indeed, thus? England can supply a million of Sabbath school children able to confute you! With Christ and with his Apostles, after his ascension, was not preaching the one great business of life? Hear Paul: -" Christ sent me, not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel." Listen to him as he addresses Timothy: " I charge thee, before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and kingdom, Preach the Word, be instant in season, out of season." And again" How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?" And again: " It pleased God, by the foolishness of preaching, to save them that believe." You successors of the Apostles, while you gainsay their testimony, and refuse to imitate their example! That which they did only, did always, did everywhere, and gloried in doing, you do very sparingly, and deem an act at once of doubtful duty and slender benefit! Is it thus you prove your succession? In this way you will never establish your claim. Rest assured that they who most abound in the Gospel, have the best pretensions to Apostolic character.

The value and supreme importance of preaching arise from the subject of it. It proclaims the Divine love; it employs moral suasion; it is the vehicle of the Gospel testimony. Preaching, without truth, the truth as it is in Jesus, would serve no end; and hence our grief over you is double. You not only set light by the ordinance of preaching, but you have despised Gospel doctrine. Have you not declared, that "the prevailing notion, of bringing forward the doctrine of the ATONEMENT, explicitly and prominently, on all occasions, is evidently quite opposed to the teaching of Scripture?" (Tracts for the Times, No. 1xxx. p. 73) And is it come to this? Is this the doctrine of men who claim to be the successors of the Apostles? Was it not Paul's purpose, his solemn and irrevocable determination, to know nothing among men but Christ, and Him crucified? Was not every apostolic sermon, is not every apostolic epistle, full of the doctrine of the Atonement? Has not experience shown, through all ages, and through all countries, that it is the most pungent arrow in the quiver of the Spirit of God? It was Paul's object to set forth Christ crucified among all people; it is yours to conceal it from the gaze of mortals. This is another irrefragable proof of your Apostolic Succession

Again: How is it that you deny that the doctrine of Justification by Faith is an integral part of the doctrine necessary to salvation? (Fronde's Remains, p. 332) On what ground have you asserted, "that baptism, and not faith, is the primary instrument of Justification "? (Newman, p. 260) You trample the Atonement in the dust; you deride the doctrine of Justification by Faith! Setting it down as " the essence of sectarian doctrine, to consider faith, and not the sacraments, as the proper instrument of Justification and other Gospel gifts,"(Tracts, vol. 1. p. 6 Advertisement) you make this bold avowal: -" Our chief strength must be the altar; it must be in sacraments, and prayers, and a good life to give efficacy to them."(Tract lxxx, p. 125) Such are your views on these most momentous subjects; and without going further into the statement of others; we would beseech you, by the tender mercies of our God, to consider well your position. Of the Apostles you cannot be the successors, and of the Apostolic bishops you are not. In point of doctrine, the heavens and the earth are not more widely asunder than you and they. If there is mind in man, and meaning in language, you are most fearfully perverting the truths of God!
Rome’s Rejection of Christ’s one Offering
An Exposure by Joseph Irons
Joseph Irons

I hasten to say a word or two, and perhaps rather severely, relative to the sinfulness of either rejecting or mocking this one offering for sin. And I do not know whether I should detain you much here, were it not for the alarming signs of the times.

Who would have believed, thirty years ago, that England would have swallowed down Popery by wholesale as it has done? I remember Dr. Hawker, about as long ago as that, positively laughed at the idea –

"What! Think of entering into controversy with Popery now, at this late period; it is a thing never to be entered upon or thought of."

What would he say now, when, in the most plausible and Jesuitical forms, Popery is palmed upon millions in England and its colonies, in such wise as to be accounted a reasonable, and proper and excellent thing?

Now I want to show my hearers, in case they might meet with any of these Jesuits, that their religion is altogether a mockery of Christ and Christianity. The extolling of the merits of Masses is a blasphemous insult to Christ, whether I look at it among mock Protestants or among those deceivers that we commonly call priests. In either case, Christ is rejected and mocked. If there need any sacrifice of the Mass, which they tell us is continually offered up, then Christ’s sacrifice is not worth my accepting – I reject Him at once if I want any other. I cannot possibly look for merit in the creature without believing that the merit of Christ is not sufficient – I cannot look for merit in the creature doing without announcing, in that very act, that I am not satisfied that Christ spoke the truth when He said, ‘It is finished.’ If it is finished, an eternal redemption is obtained; any pretension to add to it, is nothing less than a blasphemous insult to Christ. I would use stronger language if I could find it; but I merely notice the facts, leaving you to make what God shall enable you, of them.

The whole farrago, of the free-will scheme is, in fact, abstract Popery and I believe all the Arminians will go over to Popery in the great crisis. They got their Arminianism from Rome – let them carry it back again, we shall be very glad to get rid of them.

If there be some saving efficacy in prayer or in repentance (or, as they call it, penance) then there is something incomplete in Christ – then He had not gone to the end of the law – then He had not satisfied justice – then He had not fully glorified the Father on the earth, which He declared He had done. Popery and Arminianism make Christ out to be a wilful liar. Nothing softer than this can I use.

My hearer, if you will only look at yourself as a guilty, ruined sinner as the Bible sets forth, you must come to the conclusion that nothing can meet your case but a perfect salvation, the redemption in Christ Jesus which can allow no addition. All attempts to add thereto are a rejection and a mockery of Christ.

Now having named these things as boldly as I can, I want just to remind you that negotiation with the Father is not attainable by any human power but in and by this offering: ‘No man cometh unto the Father but by me.’

‘Yes’, says the priest ‘you can come by me; or I will go for you if you will give me plenty of money.’ I will not believe those lying priests – I will believe my Lord who is a Priest forever after the order of Melchisedec. ‘No man can come unto the Father but by me’ and all that would stand in my way I would push on the one side and say:

‘Hinder me not my advocate is on high – His blood is sprinkled on my conscience – His offering is made once for all – I am coming direct to the throne to plead His merits and righteousness and I will not be hindered by mortals; I will go straight to the throne and name no other name but His for "there is no other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved"’

Oh if my brethren in the ministry would but speak out these things we should heave Antichrist overboard, I do believe, even now. May God grant it!

Now what is our negotiation with God? Nothing by way of merit, nothing by way of righteousness, nothing by way of acceptance – that is all done. I do not know how it is with you but I am obliged to come day by day, with my empty sack, for a multitude of wants to be supplied. I want more grace, more life, more love, more activity in all the graces, more deadness to the world, more fellowship with the Father and His Son Jesus Christ, more power of conquest over inbred corruption, the world, the flesh and the devil. I want supplies of all needful grace. Now I cannot get access to the throne to obtain any of these supplies but by virtue of this one offering. Do you want any other?

I have been pleading it between forty and fifty years, and I have never found it to fail, and I mean to go on pleading it so long as I stay upon earth; and my Lord has graciously told me, that those who thus come to Him shall have no good thing withheld from them. Go to the footstool of Divine mercy, guilt-burdened sinner, and name the blood and righteousness of Christ. Go and point the Father to His sufferings in Gethsemane and on Calvary. Go and tell what Christ has done – perfected for ever them that are sanctified, and dare assert under all the load of your guilt, ‘Lord I believe in the efficacy and power of that offering’; and go on till you are enabled to say ‘ I believe it was offered for me’. Then begins your peace and happiness.

I pray you to mark once more, that all negotiations must be successful when the name and merit and righteousness of Jesus are pleaded. This leads me to the last thought that the trust and confidence of all the elect of God will be found placed there.

"Let Papists trust what names they please
Of saints and angels boast;
We’ve no such advocates as these,
Nor pray to the’ heavenly host"

-- Watts

This marks the election of grace. Carry this one thought with you, that all the elect of God, wherever placed on earth, are invariably brought, sooner or later to this point of trust and confidence – to renounce all other hopes and dependencies and to rest not in frames and feelings, not in sensible enjoyments, not in sufferings, but to confide exclusively in the person, official character and perfect work of the Lord Jesus Christ. And whoever is brought there by the power of the Holy Spirit is an elect vessel of mercy, afore prepared unto glory and shall eternally enjoy the presence of that Christ, in His unveiled glory, who offered Himself once for all to redeem His Church. For it is written ‘He shall see the travail of His soul and be satisfied’ And again ‘He shall see his seed’. Therefore all who are brought by grace Divine to trust in this one offering to the exclusion of all others, most infallibly gain the realms of everlasting glory.

Judge then whether it be wiser or safer to trust to the fabulous teaching of sinful, self-interested priesthood, who tell you of a multitude of sacrifices and offerings of which they are the dispensers, at a very dear rate, and which after all, leave you entangled in contingencies and uncertainties, nay, in certain ruin, or to take the infallible word of God as your guide and trust that one offering, offered once for all upon Mount Calvary, for the expiation of the guilt of all the election of grace?

The former is the trap of priest-craft, the trickery of Satan, and the tribute of fools; but the latter is the truth of God, the triumph of faith and the testimony of real Christianity.

Now in matters of merchandise, every man’s common sense would immediately decide where such a wide disparity exists; but, wonderful as it may appear, in matters of the highest importance man uniformly decides in favour of delusion, until the grace of God opens his understanding to understand the Scriptures and creates in him a capacity to discover the difference between things spiritual and things natural, or between material things and things immaterial. Even the avowed Infidel, if he were only to use his boasted reasoning powers, would see that the help he is giving to the advancement of Popery must terminate in the destruction of his idol - The Liberty of the Press. For wherever Popery is ascendant in power, the liberty of the press is quite suppressed; then follows the liberty of principal; after that the liberty of property and the liberty of persons; so that the word liberty, which is the charm of the present age will be annihilated as soon as Popery obtains its full power; and the wild libertinism of modern times will be exchanged for the most degrading bondage and vassalage ever known on earth. Would to God that men would think!

But where spiritual understanding is bestowed and vital goodness is possessed, the Bible will be the lamp of the feet and the guide of the path, and consequently, the atonement of Christ will be the only object of faith to the utter rejection of priest-craft with all its lying wonders and unwarrantable pretensions. Being under the teaching of the Holy Spirit His testimony of Jesus is received and embraced with delight, which testimony the apostle was inspired to record thus:

‘By Him all that believe are justified from all things from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses’ And ‘Being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him’

Faith receives these testimonies and sings ‘In whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace.’

Oh may that infallible Testifier of Jesus perform His office among us now, applying these fundamental truths with power Divine and invincible to your hearts, and Israel’s Triune Jehovah shall have all the glory for ever and ever. AMEN
Virgin Worship
"Oh Mary, the most sweet patron of the distressed! The most learned advocate of the guilty, and the only hope of those who despair' the illustrious SAVIOUR OF SINNERS--hear and assist ' me, most benignant Mother of God and mercy!"
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

THE worship of the Virgin Mary throughout the Romish Church, is one of those things which there is no denying, any more than that the sun is in the firmament. It is a prime element of the system; and were it to be taken out of her literature, her conversation, and her devotions, it would leave a void that would look like desolation. Throughout the whole of the Popedom, wherever the eye falls it lights on images of the Virgin and her child.

These stare you in the face at every corner of every street; they occupy a place in every room of every house, and are prominent at every altar; they are stamped on everything. These facts are not, and cannot be denied; there is, indeed, no hesitation on the part of the priests and people in confessing them. A Papist is no more ashamed to confess that he worships the Virgin, than that he looks at the sun or treads the earth.

A most intelligent and penetrating clergyman of the Church of England, Mr. Hobart Seymour, who recently visited, and for a season sojourned at Rome concerning which he has published a valuable book, declares that "the religion of Italy ought to be called not the religion of Jesus Christ, but the religion of the Virgin." The Son of God is in a great measure lost and forgotten amid the glories which surround his Mother, among the ignorant multitude.

The Virgin, ever in the heart, the eye, and on the lip, is adored as their Alpha and Omega. She is, however, not merely the object of adoration; prayers are addressed to her in order to obtain all mercies of all sorts, for both worlds. She is supplicated for every thing that the sinner requires, or that the Most High Himself can give, and constantly takes precedence of the Messiah. The pattern prayer of. Pope Innocent thus addresses her: "I humbly and devoutly beg that with all the saints and elect of God, thou wouldst come and hasten to my direction and assistance, in all my difficulties, necessities, and in all my prayers." "Oh Mary, the most sweet patron of the distressed! The most learned advocate of the guilty, and the only hope of those who despair' the illustrious SAVIOUR OF SINNERS--hear and assist ' me, most benignant Mother of God and mercy!"

What says the reader to this? Was he really ' aware that this daughter of Abraham was viewed and adored as the "illustrious Saviour of Sinners?" Does he observe its impiety? Let him but compare the language with that of the New Testament, and see how the spirit which pervades the references which are there made to Mary, correspond with it. Nothing can be more natural than the place there assigned to "the highly honoured among women;" but surely nothing can be less congruous with the notion that she was to be viewed as a Divine person, who was to determine the life and death of the human race! There is most assuredly nothing there from which it could be imagined that she was to become the object of divine worship.

The Popish fiction in this case, is the most extraordinary, since, as in the case of images, there is not even the usual fragment of Scripture on which, by the aid of perversion, combined with falsehood and forgery, a sort of foundation maybe laid for the act. Beyond Luke I. 28, nothing is said, or pretended; and there, the angel, so far from worshipping, only addressed the trembling woman with a respectable salutation, "Hail;" and is it so that Virgin Worship has no other foundation than these few simple words; and yet in spite of this, the creative spirit of the Vatican, has actually raised her into a divinity, changed the truth of God' into a lie, and "worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator. "This is another reason for, withholding the Word of God from the people.

Were a Papist perusing the Sacred Scriptures to' investigate them for guidance on the subject of Virgin Worship; he would very speedily discover the impious deception which had been practised upon him, and with grief and scorn, rid himself of the imposture. As it is, he walks in darkness, delights, himself in fiction, and builds all his happiness upon a frail human creature like himself, and as much dependent as he on the blood and righteousness of her own son! Yet such is the principal object of Roman worship. By the young and old, rich. and; poor, on earth and ocean, she is everywhere worshipped, morning, noon, and night.

Protestant travellers, in Popish countries, have all to record the infatuated perversion with which the populace give themselves up to the worship of the Virgin. The first lesson communicated to a Popish child is the duty of worshipping the Virgin, of whom he is taught to think as a sort of royal grandmother, wonderfully rich, astonishingly compassionate, and very fond of him; that constantly repeated throughout the rest of his days, and to obey it becomes his main business on earth. The Catholic schoolbook thus enjoins the duty upon every reader: "Have recourse to her in all your spiritual necessities, and for that end, offer to her daily some particular prayers, as you can find no succour more ready and favourable than hers."

No fewer than five festivals are every year observed in her honour. All claim her friendship; the thought of it nerves the foot-pad to commit robbery, and when he deems it necessary, to shed blood. The heart and the picture of Mary, are as necessary to him for his daily vocation, as his poignard and his pistol! These he will kiss on the scaffold, avowing that they have the power to make death easy!

Is the reader, in the exuberance of his charity, tempted to think that surely such things must refer to an age long gone by, and can have no existence now? Let him be assured that at no period of the history of the Popedom was Mary-worship more rampant than at this moment. This is one of those j things which there has not been an attempt to veil or modify for the sake of decency, or to conciliate Protestants for purposes of Proselytism. It was but j a few years back, for example, that Pope Gregory, addressing the Papal world, expressed his entire dependence of himself, and what he called his "flock," upon her "heavenly influence," and not satisfied with that, with his own pen, he indited the following language: "That all may have a successful and happy issue, let us raise our eyes to the Most Blessed Virgin Mary, who alone destroys heresies, who is our greatest hope, yea, our entire ground of hope."

Here then, the Great Infallible places himself entirely at the mercy of the Virgin, and looks to her for the supply of every want; but shocking as this language is, it is by no means the worst. This famous document avows the doctrine in a manner which at once gives to Mary the precedency over her Son. Nor should it be thought a strange expression; it is in perfect harmony with all the deliverances of previous and subsequent Popes. Mary shares the glory of redemption, for example, with the Lord Jesus Christ! The language is intolerably shocking, but it is not the less true. According to the same Pope Gregory XVI, "She was elected among the daughters of Zion to be the mother of the Eternal Word of Divine Life. She was preordained to be the co-redeemer of the world!"

While in the work of redemption then, she is his equal, in that of intercession, she is his superior; and hence both saints and sinners are told that they will find. their account in dealing with the Mother rather than with the Son. According to the "Popish Rambler," in its recent review of Mr. Seymour, "She is all mercy; He is both mercy and justice;" her office towards men, is purely one of "pity;" so that "a sinner's prayers are more sure to be heard by her than by her Son!"

Again, where haste is any object, she is the party with whom it is expedient to deal. We are told by Alphonsus Liguori-a great favourite, by the way, with the late Cardinal Wiseman-that prayers will often be more speedily heard in invoking her name, than in calling on that of Jesus Christ

Such then, reader, is a glimpse of a subject that might be extended to a volume; assuming that you are satisfied, we have only to ask you whether the infatuation and the impiety here manifested, be not equal to anything of the sort that has ever been brought before you? Say if darkness be not essential to the Popedom; and whether the spirit of prophecy has not most correctly designated it "a kingdom full of darkness!"

Would not the spread of the Sacred Scriptures be utter destruction to this, as well as its other tenets? Again then, we ask, is it a wonder that the priesthood should cherish such an aversion to the Word of God? But is it not, in very deed, a wonder that Protestants should be so indifferent to the presence and the spread of this most impious system in the British Isles? Is it not passing strange that while it comprises so much that ought to fill all good men's hearts with grief and indignation, that they should be so apathetic, so little disposed to make adequate efforts for its check, and its overthrow? Does not Popery combine all that I, is most destructive on earth, with all that is insulting to heaven, and is it not strange that it should be viewed, not only with indifference, but even with complacency, actually finding advocates among so called Protestants, and receiving imperial endowments from the exchequer of a Protestant state? Is it not dreadful that this system, both at home and abroad, should be petted and pensioned by the Government of England? Are not these things meet subjects for a lamentation?
The Jesuits
Englishmen! Be not deceived. You are to know that these are the men that marshal the hosts of Antichrist in your midst! Do not, therefore, underrate your danger; it is great!
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

ANY view of Popery would be seriously defective which should pass over the Jesuits, who, for many generations, have performed a part so conspicuous in the affairs of Rome. That most peculiar and dangerous class of men have earned for themselves the jealousy and hatred of no small portion of the human race. A fact so remarkable must have a cause sufficient to account for it. Whole nations, and successive generations never rise against an order of men without some sound and urgent reason, and the history of the Jesuits shows that their case forms no exception to the general rule.

They have merely reaped as they sowed. Had the enemy of mankind been permitted to become incarnate and to set up a visible court on earth, the Jesuits would have supplied him with suitable ministers, bodyguard, and officers for all his objects. Gifted, cultivated, discreet, crafty, persevering, and energetic, they lay themselves soul and body on the altar of Rome, and only lived to promote her ambitious and impious projects.

Never was spiritual, government so perfect; never was centralization so complete; every man was a host in himself, alike able to lead and follow-an impersonation of all the higher attributes of wickedness. They seemed spirits of darkness who had got possession of human bodies, so thoroughly were they divested of all the better attributes of man, and so thoroughly the temples of iniquity. There was nothing so atrocious that they were incapable of it, -nothing so arduous that they were not equal to it. -Truth, or principle, whether moral or religious, was ignored among them. Great for evil was their power, while their right hand was uniformly the right hand of falsehood!

They seemed to have been pupils of the Prince of Darkness himself, while so successfully had their studies been conducted that each was fitted to have misled a world of innocents, or to have acted as Premier to Pan demonium! The sense of right and wrong was utterly destroyed within them. Regardless alike of God and man, promises and oaths, the moment that either was found to stand in the way of a deed which might serve the Church, it was given to the winds.

The flagrant lie, the deceitful appearance, the poison or the dagger, were hallowed instruments in their hands; in the suggestion of deeds of infamy, or in their perpetration, they were equally at home; they stood -ready, at any hour, to shed the blood of saints, or of kings; everything human and divine was subordinated to this one thing-the Pontifical. glory. They met all difficulties by their never-failing maxim - "The end sanctifies the means," till at length they became the terror of the World, and odious to every friend of virtue. England, always foremost in all that is great and good, to her honour, was the first to expel them.

This event occurred in 1604; and, two years afterwards, Venice, among the few things either wise or good she ever did, followed the laudable example. In 1759 they were driven from Portugal; four years' after from France, and three years subsequently from Spain. In 1775 even Pope Clement XIV. Himself became ashamed of them; they had by this time rendered themselves such objects of fear and aversion throughout Europe that their existence could no longer be tolerated.

The result was their formal abolition as an Order; but even this did not amount to much; it was merely an army disbanded, the soldiers still surviving, and ready at any moment, to be reassembled. During the long and dreadful war which desolated Europe, they were but little heard of, having small opportunities to further their plans. No sooner, however, had peace been restored in 1814, when the history of their misdeeds had almost been forgotten, than Pope Pius VII. restored them, and from that time to this they have been carrying on their machinations against mankind with as much zeal, and as little, principle as ever.

England, we regret to say, is; now open to their depredations on her virtue and her religion; and, as might be supposed, they are making the most of it. From the importance Rome attaches to her conversion to the service of Antichrist, their services are eminently concentrated on her. It is felt that to recover England were to possess the whole world; her cities and plains, therefore, are once more the chief theatre of the Papal conflict. The Jesuits are her principal officers. They have been the prime instruments in the events, which a few years back convulsed her, and with them it will be, unless Protestants bestir themselves, to finish what they have so openly and hopefully begun.

Such are the Jesuits; and the fact that such men can be so necessary to the Papal system, and occupy, in its movements, a place of such distinction, alone suffices to furnish against her grounds of an indictment which, if prosecuted, must issue in a decisive condemnation. It is enough to call forth the united virtue of mankind against her, and against this most dangerous class of Popish agency. Unless restrained they will become once more the right hand of the Pontificate, and the terror of the nations.

Englishmen! Be not deceived. You are to know that these are the men that marshal the hosts of Antichrist in your midst! Do not, therefore, underrate your danger; it is great! But if not faithless to your principles, and to your Divine Head, victory will be yours. Your fathers encountered and overthrew them; and it is for you to repeat the deed of your sires. The weapons of the Jesuits are falsehoods, yours are truth; with these march forth in the name and the love of God, and drive them from your borders! Drive them not only from the English Church, but from the English nation.
Worship Of Saints And Angels
There is one peculiarity about this sin; the doctrine has not even the usual small fragment of truth to rest on.
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

AMONG the charges that are justly brought against the Church of Rome, is that of worshipping saints and angels; and it is worthy of observation, that this is not denied by the Papists themselves. We are, therefore, absolved from all necessity of an attempt at proof, and hence the controversy turns on the merit of the dead, in itself considered. Popery defends, and Protestantism condemns it; and the point to be settled is, with whom lies the truth? Who can claim the suffrage of reason and of Scripture? This point, once discussed and determined, nothing more remains; but now it may be assumed, that as the greater contains the less, if angels are not to be worshipped, men are not; and it can be absolutely demonstrated from the Word of God that angels are not to be worshipped.

This we have from their own lips; it has been attempted by men, and by angels indignantly rejected. The seeds of all evil seem to have been sown in the Church about the same time. Nearly four centuries had passed away before these abominations were thought of; but, like most of the other evils to which they stand so unhappily related, it was not long in overrunning the earth. There is one peculiarity about this sin; the doctrine has not even the usual small fragment of truth to rest on. It is wholly baseless; there could be nothing found in the Word of God on which to exert the plastic power of forgery and falsehood; it rests, therefore, upon reason.

Well, in the way of reason it is argued, that it is a mark of humility to approach the Most High through the spirits of the brethren that are "made perfect," rather than to go direct ourselves to the Father of Spirits, while their prayers as utterances of purity and excellence, are far more likely to be heard than those of men still compassed with infirmity, and but ill able to order their speech by reason of their darkness.

The answer to such a style of talk is obvious; suffice it to say that it is to attempt to improve upon the Divine wisdom. Had this been the best plan of intercourse between God and man, it would have been a part of the Divine economy, and men would have received instructions to that effect; but no such instructions are given, the inference therefore, is clear. But the matter does not end here; the act is highly criminal; it is a direct insult to the one Mediator between God and man.

Christians are permitted and commanded to pray for each other on earth, just as in all other respects, they are called upon to "bear one another's burdens;" but no such prayer is known in heaven. It is proper, however, to hear the Popish advocates. Let us, therefore, refer at once to the fountain of Romish orthodoxy, and see how it is dealt with by the Council of Trent:

"The saints, reigning with Christ, offer up their prayers to God, for man; hence it is good and useful supplicantly to invoke them; and to seek refuge (confugere, i.e. flee for succour or relief,) in their prayers, help, and assistance, to obtain favour from God, through his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who is alone our Redeemer and Saviour."

The far-famed creed of Pope Pius IV. sets out with the same doctrine: That "the saints reigning with Christ are to be worshipped and invoked." Of Virgin worship we need not speak, having discussed that point in another chapter; we have here to do only with men called "saints," and of these the Papists have great numbers. Like the local deities of the heathen, they cover all places, and extend to all pursuits.

Every trade and profession has its patron saint-even diseases have their controlling president; nor are the brute-beasts forgotten! The sailor hoists his flag in the name of St. Christopher; St. Agatha rules amid flames of fire, and is to be invoked to preserve from burning; students bow the knee to St. Nicolas; the painter does homage at the shrine of St. Luke; Saint Cornelia looks after the concerns of those who are subject to falling sickness; and St. Appolonia conducts the affairs of the toothache! St. Loy presides over the destinies of horses, and St. Anthony manages the swine!

This may serve as a specimen of these and other saints, whose devotees rejoice in their delusion, crowding the edifices which contain the images of their respective saints, especially upon the days allotted to their honour, when they kiss and embrace them with a fanatical fervour that is altogether extraordinary.

The subject is too ridiculous for reasoning; it proceeds from a state of mind which mere arguments alone will never cure; it is the fruit of ignorance which can be removed only by knowledge; it is will worship, which, while it can bring no good to the creature, cannot fail to be highly offensive to the Creator, since it impiously derogates from the honour and glory of the Lord Jesus Christ. It comes under the same principle as that which pervades the discussion concerning the worship of the Virgin.

It is the introduction of a class of secondary and subordinate mediators who practically have taken the place of the chief, the Lord of Glory, whom by implication, it treats as an unsuitable person for this work of mediation, in the first instance; it implies the necessity of a mediator with a mediator, which, however, as we have said, involves ultimately the exclusion of the primary mediator.

The idea is preposterous, and at utter variance with the foundation of the mediatorial economy. It deserves to be viewed as a serious matter, alike affecting the glory of Christ and the best interests of mankind. The mediatorial work of the Messiah is one and indivisible; no more can He share that with his creatures, than He could the work of the atonement; and it is just as much permitted to creatures to affect to divide with Him the work of "making an end of sin "-and it is actually done hourly, and everywhere-as of interceding for the sinner. Thus, then, in all points, Popery divides with Him, or robs Him utterly of his glory. The worship of men, whether Apostles or others, is an act of monstrous impiety, full of peril to those who attempt it.

But of angels little need be said beyond the fact that their worship extensively prevails in the Church of Rome, while it is wholly without foundation in the Word of God; and in all respects comes under the same condemnation as the Worship of the Saints. In harmony with our plan, however, it may be proper to show that the practice is founded on the highest Roman authority, since it is regularly provided for by the Council of Trent, in the following words:

"The angels are to be worshipped, because they continually behold God, and have most willingly undertaken the charge of our salvation confided to them."

The homilies of the Church of England contain some excellent thoughts on this subject, which we commend to our readers, while we have much pleasure in closing the present chapter with the admirable words of that greatest of the ancients, in whose days the evil prevailed-Augustine-who thus speaks:

"I can address myself more cheerfully and more safely to my Lord Jesus Christ, than to any of the Holy spirits of God; for this we have a commandment, for the other we have none. There are many promises made to him who prays to Christ that he shall be heard; but to him who prays to saints there is not one in the whole Bible."
Duties Of Protestants
Let the faithful of every land rejoice in the assurance that the reign of Antichrist shall have an end!
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

IN dealing with an adversary, a point of the first importance, is, to ascertain his strength, and to understand the principles of his policy. This is particularly so in the case of Rome. There is nothing in which her boasted unity is so strikingly manifested; whether in Europe, or America, in China, or in Polynesia, her principle of proceeding is one and unchangeable, and the means she employs to gain her ends are the same.

Perhaps, no man ever more accurately gauged the spirit of the Popedom than Sir Edwin Sandys in his celebrated Europe Speculum. a "Survey of the State of Religion in the Western Parts of the World, wherein the Roman Catholic Religion and the Pregnant Policies to Support the same are notably displayed." This work, published in 1629, has not been surpassed in some of its views by anything which has since appeared on the subject of Popery. We offer the following, as in our judgment, thoroughly expressing the true character of the system against which Protestants have to contend:

"This being the main ground-work of their policy, and the general means to build and establish it in the minds of all men, the particular ways they hold to ravish all affections and to fit each humour (which their jurisdiction and power, being but persuasive and voluntary, they principally regard), are well-nigh infinite ; there being not anything either sacred or profane, no virtue, nor vice almost, no things of how contrary condition soever, which they make not in some sort to serve that turn; that each fancy may be satisfied, and each appetite find what to feed on. Whatsoever either wealth can sway with the lovers, or voluntary poverty with the despisers of the world; what honour with the ambitious; what obedience with the humble; what great employment with stirring and mettled spirits; what perpetual quiet with heavy and restive bodies; what extent the pleasant nature can take in pastimes and jollity; what contrariwise the austere mind in discipline and rigour; what love either chastity can raise in the pure, or voluptuousness in the dissolute; what allurements are in knowledge to draw the contemplative, or in actions of state to possess the practic dispositions; what with the hopeful prerogative of reward can work; what errors, doubts, and dangers with the fearful; what change of vows with the rash, of estate with the inconstant; what pardons with the faulty, or supplies with the defective; what miracles with the credulous; what visions with the fantastical; what gorgeousness of shows with the vulgar and simple; what multitudes of ceremonies with the superstitious and ignorant; what prayer with the devout; what with the charitable works of piety; what rules of higher perfection with elevated affections; what dispensing with breach of all rules with men of lawless conditions;-in sum, what thing soever can prevail with any man, either for himself to pursue or at leastwise to love, reverence, or honour in another (for ever therein also man's nature receiveth great satisfaction) ; the same is found with them, not as in other places of the world, by casualty blended without order, and of necessity, but sorted in great part into several professions, countenanced with reputation, honoured with prerogatives, facilitated with provisions and yearly maintenance, and either (as the better things) advanced with expectation of reward, or borne with, how bad soever, with sweet and silent permission. What pomp, what riot, to that of their cardinals? What severity of life comparable to their hermits and capuchins? Who wealthier than their prelates? Who poorer by vow and profession than their mendicants! On the one side of the street a cloister of virgins; on the other a sty of conrtezans, with public toleration; this day all in masks with all. looseness and foolery; tomorrow all in processions, whipping themselves till the blood follows. On one door an excommunication, throwing to hell all transgressors; on another a jubilee or full discharge from all transgression; who learneder in all kinds of sciences than their Jesuits? What thing more ignorant than their ordinary masspriests? What prince so able to prefer his servants and followers as the Pope, and in so great multitude? Who able to take deeper or readier revenge on his enemies? What pride equal unto his, making kings kiss his pantofle? What humility greater than his, shriving himself daily on his knees to an ordinary priest? Who difficulter in dispatch of causes to the greatest? Who easier in giving audience to the meanest? Where greater rigour in the world in exacting the observation of the church laws? Where less care or conscience of the commandments of God? To taste flesh on a Friday, where suspicion might fasten, were a matter for the Inquisition; whereas, on the other side, the Sunday is one of their greatest market-days. To conclude-never state, never government in the world, so strangely compacted of infinite contrarieties, all tending to entertain the several humours of all men, and to work what kind of effects soever they shall desire; where rigour and remissness, cruelty and lenity, are so combined that with neglect of the Church, to stir aught is a sin unpardonable; whereas with duty towards the Church, and by intercession for her allowance, with respective attendance of her pleasure, no law almost of God or nature so sacred, which one way or other they find not means to dispense with, or at leastwise permit the breach of by connivance and without disturbance."

What a picture! What a cluster! How perfect the system, and how atrocious the principle by which it is animated! Such is the system against which Protestants have to contend. The point, therefore, is to ascertain how, and by what means, the contest is to be carried on. These questions we shall now endeavour to answer.

First. The Holy Scriptures must always, and everywhere, take the precedence as alone the "power of God unto salvation." According to prophecy, the Man of Sin is to be "destroyed by the breath" of the Lord's mouth, and the "brightness of his coming."

The inspired page is the "Sword of the Spirit," with which he slays the enemies of the King. The hatred which the Popish priesthood bear to the Divine Word speaks volumes on this subject. Such hate is the measure of its power to convict, expose, and overthrow.

Popery and the Bible cannot co-exist, one or other must succumb. Let Bible societies, therefore, be multiplied to the extent of the necessity through all the land; and let all Protestants not only support, but to the uttermost cooperate with them in the work of universal diffusion. We attach more importance to this than all other, instruments united. The Bible is the tree whose "leaves are for the healing of the nations;" let its branches, therefore, encircle the whole earth, and I the people of every clime will at length rejoice in cure and health.

Secondly. Family worship constitutes another and a principal means of advancing the great work. In the reading of the Holy Word, and in the running exposition of it, which as much as may be, should be everywhere practised, endless opportunities occur for passing remarks on Popery. In family prayer, too, the subject should have a frequent place, which will greatly contribute to elevate its importance, and to bring it home to the heart and the conscience of a household. With a view to this the heads of families should endeavour to understand the subject, that they may order their words aright.

Thirdly. Next to the family the Sunday school is entitled to particular notice; its exercises ought to make large provision for full instruction on this vital question. A due admixture of special instruction should be always found in the elder classes. A passing remark in the course of the school addresses may likewise have the happiest effects. Small and simple Protestant publications, suited to young people, ought to constitute an element in the Sunday school library. Appropriate exercises on the subject, might be prescribed with great benefit.

The subject ought to be kept specially in view by the conductors of Christian missions-city, town, home, and foreign. The competence of the missionary should be matter of careful examination. Even now an intimate acquaintance with the subject is often called for, and the demand is continually upon the increase.

Fourthly. The Common School supplies a very important means of acting beneficially on the public mind. That school was a mighty power for good in Scotland in the days of the Reformation; but that it may be so again it must be carried on by men of the same ethereal spirit-men wise in heart and full of holy fervour, fervent lovers of the truth, and intense haters of the Man of Sin. Such men will not be satisfied with the mere routine reading of the Holy Scriptures in the school; but, like the associates of Nehemiah, they will "give the sense," and cause the boys "to understand the reading." Such men will do well, at proper times, to give the scholars set addresses on subjects connected with Popery and Protestantism.

There are many touching facts, incidents, and narratives which may be worked up into very effective discourses. The tale of its crimes, cruelties, and abominations will not be lost on the tender sensibilities of the young. Every schoolmaster, before his appointment, should be subjected to a rigorous examination as to his qualification for this part of his office, which should be considered vital.

Fifthly. In the school of the prophets, special provision ought to be made for thoroughly indoctrinating all young men on the subject of Popery and Protestantism. To this end all the main points should be indicated in a course of lectures, combined with the reading of the best treatises on the subject; and to secure the application necessary, there ought to be on the lecture, and also upon the books, periodical and searching examinations.

Sixthly. The pulpit must ever be the main instrument in carrying on the war against Popery. Much may there be effected by passing remarks in the reading of the Scriptures, by occasional references in the course of sermons, and sometimes by an entire sermon or lecture. Above all, pulpits prayer, in the midst of the assemblies of the saints, may be the means of realizing the greatest blessing.

Apart from the direct benediction, which neverfails to attend the prayer of the faithful, as a moral means of impressing the truth on the mind of men, it surpasses every other. It brings the subject within the hallowed domain of conscience, and thus blends it with the governing principles of the heart and life. Time was, within the memory of a few of the living generation, when it was both most affecting, and most refreshing, to hear the elder ministers of Scotland pouring out their mighty hearts in streams of fervent supplication against Rome, with all her mysteries and all her abominations. May the ministers that now fill their places receive an abundant baptism of the same spirit

Seventhly. Public lectures are a very valuable species of instrumentality, which deserves to be sedulously cultivated. This sort of labour prevailed very extensively in the times of the Reformation in Scotland and elsewhere, and vast were the benefits thence arising.

Eighthly. Periodical literature is a power which can hardly be overvalued. Such publications as the Scottish Bulwark, for example, deserve a foremost place in the regard of all true Protestants. Were the Bulwark, from month to month, to find a place in every British family, it would work wonders both in generating, and in nourishing a true Protestant spirit. That alone, we should deem almost enough to give a check to the progress of the Romish superstition throughout British families.

Ninthly. Good Protestant tracts cannot be too highly prized, and if largely illustrated with appropriate engravings, so much the better; the taste of the time runs greatly in that direction, and thus the truth often finds its way through the eye to the understanding. Popish tracts of this description are being prepared in large numbers, with a view to acting upon the imagination of the masses, conciliating them to Popery, and stirring them up against Protestantism. This is a point to be steadily kept in mind by local associations for the circulation of religious tracts; by a due mixture of these, much may be done to expose the evils of the Vatican.

Tenthly. In meetings of Christians for social prayer, the subject should be steadily kept before the mind of both the leaders and the people. Let the downfall of the ensanguined system of Rome be matter of united, fervent, and frequent supplication. To this end, the leaders in prayer ought themselves to be thoroughly at home in the great subject, and to be well posted up in matters affecting Popery at the present time. The regular perusal of the Bulwark would be very serviceable in this matter.

Such are the chief of the moral and spiritual means of checking and extirpating Popery; but that they may be successfully carried out, there must be in all things consistency in the conduct of those who aspire to that honour. For instance, it is not consistent for individuals who profess to dissent from Romanism on the ground of its truthlessness and impiety, of its corruption and cruelty, of its opposition to the gospel of mercy and its malignant enmity to Christ the Lord, in any way to lend themselves to its advancement.

Is it consistent in them to give up the substance of which God has made them stewards, to erect schools, churches, so called, and cathedrals? If this be consistency we are at a loss to comprehend the nature of its opposite. Such things, however, have been done-done in many places, and to a considerable extent-done in the teeth of remonstrance from men better taught-and done apparently in a spirit of glorying in the deed as one of laudable liberality. But surely that is a questionable liberality which violates high and holy principles; which takes part with men who are enemies of the Lord, and supplies materials to sustain and extend rebellion against Him.

We are at a loss to understand how any man who professes to be a Christian, can be a party to such proceedings. Such an act is one not of an indifferent character, it is a positive participation in rebellion, so far as means and practical sympathy are concerned, with the enemy of God and his Christ, and can only be set down to the score of ignorance, indifference, or infidelity! The man who does it should renounce his Protestantism. Would Knox, or Calvin, or Luther, have contributed to erect such edifices, and thus furnish the means of corrupting mankind, spreading darkness, and filling the world with death? No; they would sooner have laid their heads upon the block, have been broken on the wheel; or burned at the stake!

These strictures are prompted by the knowledge of what has too often occurred in divers parts of the country. The point is one to which we attach the utmost importance. Nothing can be more incongruous than the issue from the same lips of "sweet water and bitter," than to supply materials for building a house along with materials for burning it down! Such conduct is not merely foolish, but wicked; it ranks with treason to the Most High!

The Roman question is one which ought most', deeply to interest every man in England, whether of the Church or of the world, whatever his rank or condition, his party in politics or in religion. It cannot be too often repeated that Rome is alike the fierce, the inveterate, the irreconcilable enemy of liberty, both civil and religious, all over the world. The, thraldom, which obtains in such horrid perfection in Rome, the Pope and the Cardinals wish to see established everywhere; they desire it to be taken as a': model state.

The truth of the allegation is attested by universal history. The best, and by far the greatest, example of modern times is furnished by the fearful struggle that is now going on in the New World. The Pope, crafty and false, to conciliate the Federals with their Emancipation, sent over a whining pastoral, affecting much sympathy with the slaves. The American archbishop, bishops, and clergy, perfectly understanding his Holiness, preserved their own attitude, and set their faces as a flint against the North and liberty.

One of the ablest of the American journals has borne the following testimony, which we rejoice to place on record in England, as exposing the hypocrisy and wickedness of the Pope and his clergy. The journal testifies as follows:

"We have, on several recent occasions, briefly discussed the attitude of the Roman Catholic clergy of this country with regard to the fearful trials to which our country has been subjected by slaveholding treason. The main facts to which we have from time to time called attention are as follows:

1. In all that portion of our country wherein the rebellion now bears, or has at any time borne sway, the Roman Catholic clergy, from highest to lowest, have, without a known exception, been among its earliest, most eager, most determined, most persistent champions.

2. In that portion of our country which is predominantly loyal, or practically under the sway of the Federal Government, the great body of that clergy are just as hostile to the struggle for national integrity and authority as they safely can be-discouraging enlistments in the national armies, and training their flocks, so far as possible, into casting a solid vote for the Opposition tickets.

3. The Roman Catholic clergy, with the voters whom they influence, have stubbornly resisted the progress of Emancipation in the Border States. They largely swelled last month the majority against it in Kentucky, turned the scale against it in Delaware, and did their utmost (in vain) to defeat it in Maryland and Missouri.

4. When the rebellion was triumphantly inaugurated in the South, the Catholic priesthood promptly adhered to it on the ground of obedience to `the powers that be,' which are `ordained of God;' but this rule was not permitted to operate either in the Slave States which adhered to the Union, or in those which have been recovered to it. On the contrary, though Orleans has been restored to and firmly held by the Union for nearly three years past, her Roman Catholic Archbishop and his clergy are still virulent Secessionists."

Popery, then, involves pre-eminently the question of liberty; we therefore adjure every man in England to take his place in the ranks of British patriotism, and to concentrate his most intense abhorrence on the false, cruel, impious, and diabolical system! Let Rome recover her ancient sway in; the British Isles, and the people are undone! Again will the groaning of the prisoner be heard over all the land! The axe, the gibbet, and the flame will be once more in requisition; the mirth of the land will be gone, and wailing will break forth through all her borders!

We likewise adjure every man, woman, and child enrolled in the Church of the living God, to watch and pray that they enter not into temptation to dishonour the memory of their noble fathers, the founders of English freedom, by bowing down to Popery, the monster that sits on the Seven Hills, destined to be "cast into the lake of fire, burning with brimstone," where the "beast and the false prophet shall be tormented day and night for ever."

The victory is ultimately sure and certain, in spite of earth and hell. The days of the Church's affliction will then be numbered; "the tabernacle of God will be with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God Himself shall be with them, and be their God," and shall wipe away all tears from their eyes, and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain, for the former things are passed away."

Babylon is doomed, and the hour of her Overthrow is fixed in the counsels of heaven! The day draws rapidly on when the angel of the Apocalypse will cry, "Babylon is fallen, is fallen!" "The hour of her judgment is come;" the Beast and his image shall for ever perish, and all his worshippers "shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation, and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb, and the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever. And they have no rest day nor night who worship the Beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the work of his name."

Let the faithful of every land rejoice in the assurance that the reign of Antichrist shall have an end! Popes, cardinals, and priests, with all that appertains to the accursed system, shall be carried away as with a whirlwind! Then will be fulfilled the words of prophecy, "Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets; for God hath avenged you on her! And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall the great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all!"
Condition And Prospects Of Popery
Written in 1886 by Dr John Campbell
Dr. John Campbell

THE heaviest blow ever received by Popery, was the English Reformation, from its thorough and complete nature, as compared with most corresponding events on the Continent, and from the peculiar character of the British people. But the full extent of the discomfiture was not seen till two hundred years afterwards, which revealed the place to which, in Providence, England was to be elevated among the nations of the earth; more especially has this been apparent in the course of the last sixty or seventy years.

Always great as a maritime, during that period, she has become alike great as a military, power. But the loss to Rome mainly consisted in the marvellous and unparalleled increase of the numbers, wealth, and social greatness of England, from which she has become so influential in the affairs of the world-considerations which in the eye of Rome added tenfold to her importance.

But her chief value in the esteem of the Vatican, as a sphere of Papal action, latterly, is the fact of her being to such an extent, a mother of colonies, each, in the end, destined to be a powerful nation, largely partaking of her own secular and exalted qualities. On these grounds, England is the richest object of conquest that Rome ever aspired to gain; the great globe itself could furnish nothing comparable to it; the Indies, with all their shining treasures, and teeming millions, are but a small portion of her dower.

This, however, is only one, and that by no means the most important, view of the subject. England is the stronghold of Protestantism; in no other land, as we have seen, was the Reformation from Popery so complete, and the separation from Rome so thorough. The Churches of England and of Scotland were the most essentially Protestant institutions of the sort in Europe. Whatever imperfections may attach to some portion of the Rubric of the English Church, her glorious Articles, her admirable Homilies, and her Constitution, are thoroughly Protestant; and as part and parcel of the Constitution of the country, she has, for ages, justly been considered the chief bulwark of the Protestant cause, a magnificent monument of the great Reformation, and an appalling spectacle to the Man of Sin.

But even this, however great, is not all that renders the conversion of England an object of incalculable importance to Rome. England is the home of a numerous brood of Protestant communities, every hour rising into importance, from numbers, intelligence, wealth, and organization Nonconformists, Dissenters, Methodists-all the subjects of an intense and inveterate aversion to Rome. On these and other grounds, the recovery of England was the great object of desire and labour to the Vatican. To accomplish this would have been, in effect, to accomplish everything, by laying the foundation for the rapid conquest of the whole world. Such was its own view and its own convictions, as from various authentic sources has been repeatedly proved.

For thirty years last past, appearances have been such as greatly to encourage Rome in her expectation. In the excitement of these hopes, a place of great distinction was assigned to Ireland; from an utter disregard of all considerations of prudence in the article of marriage, that country became, to an extent never previously known among the nations of Europe, a great seed-bed of the human race.

The Papal portion of the population multiplied with unexampled rapidity, while their poverty was such as to divest their wretched homes of all charm, and to prepare them for emigration to any part of the globe, since, whatever their fate, it could not fail to be an improvement upon the condition in which they were born. They began, and have continued to pour their living floods both into England, and into every colony of the empire, thus everywhere diluting the waters of British Protestantism, and laying the foundation of Papal influence. From this source alone, great hopes are justly entertained both at home and abroad, and it now becomes an especial study how the matter may best be conducted, so as to advance the objects of the Papacy.

In conjunction with this circumstance, during the same period, the powers that be have smiled upon Popery; the ancient spirit of Protestantism in the country seemed, in a great measure, to have died out. From the hour of Catholic Emancipation, so called, Popery has appeared to be visited as by the power of a genial spring; it is everywhere lifting up its head; we see it, on the judgment-seat, in the senate, and even in the cabinet of the country. Nor have the symptoms of revival been partial; the path to rank, wealth, and promotion has been ever opening; the Polish Seminary of Maynooth, which had before obtained a small annual grant, has now received endowments more than imperial, in the form of a solemn enactment, taking it out of the annual list of senatorial benefactions, while in the British Colonies, the Popish clergy are not only in many parts endowed, but distinguished by special marks of Government favour.

In the meantime, the subject of the endowment of the Popish Clergy in Ireland has once and again been a matter of reference, and incipient discussion in the Imperial Parliament; and as a further token of the disposition of statesmen, steps were taken at one period, after a separation of three hundred years, to restore diplomatic relations with the Court of Rome, but, for the present, that danger and disgrace have been averted.

While all this was going on in the nation, appearances were not less hopeful in the English Church. The noble Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, which had so long been the glory of the realm, and ages bygone the impregnable citadel of

Protestantism, began to show strong symptoms of relenting. Men of eminence opened their mouths in the face of the land, to denounce the Reformation. By conversation, by lectures, in the pulpit, and through the press, they advocated principles essentially Popish; and at length, one after another, they began to separate themselves and return to the bosom of Rome!

In the meantime the cities, towns, villages, and hamlets of the land, gradually put on strange appearances. The effect of the lessons, which had been delivered at the Universities, began to be seen in the parish. Pulpits; and in this way Popery in the bud was being extensively manifested, and to encourage the hopes of Rome neither in the higher places of the Church, nor in those of the State, was there more than a very feeble and hesitating manifestation of disapproval. It never rose to remonstrance or reproof. At the same time the work of conversion went on in the upper classes, where the effect was increased by respectability, and wealth, and the influence thence arising.

Such was the aspect of England. The spring had come and the summer was far advanced, and the field to the human eye seemed white unto harvest. All things thus prepared, the hour appeared to have arrived for the Pope to step into England as into another Promised Land, and there to clothe himself with the riches, power, and glory, of what he correctly denominated "the flourishing kingdom of England." It only remained to hoist his standard and take full possession of the British Empire, and this he proceeded to do by the establishment of his hierarchy. The tide was now at the flood, and the heart of Rome was beating high with expectation of seizing the richest prize that ever dazzled the eye of conqueror. But this was not done without protest.

A minister of the Crown, Lord John Russell, was induced to write a letter of extraordinary character, so extraordinary, indeed, that it startled the nation. The composing and publication of such a manifesto was viewed in the light of a special providence. The mind of the religious portion of the community was lashed into a tempest, and a spirit of Protestantism evoked, such as excited the astonishment not only of Rome, but of every reflecting Protestant in the realm. The Minister said: -

"There is an assumption of power in all the documents which have come from Rome-a pretension to supremacy over the realm of England, and a claim to sole and undivided sway, which is inconsistent with the Queen's supremacy, with the rights of our bishops and clergy, and with the spiritual independence of the nation, as asserted even in Roman Catholic times.

"I confess, however, that my alarm is not equal to my indignation.

"Even if it shall appear that the ministers and servants of the Pope in this country have not transgressed the law, I feel persuaded that we are strong enough to repel any outward attacks. The liberty of Protestantism has been enjoyed too long in England to allow of any successful attempt to impose a foreign yoke upon our minds anal consciences. No foreign prince or potentate will be permitted to fasten his fetters upon a nation, which has so long and so nobly vindicated its right to freedom of opinion, civil, political, and religious.

"There is a danger, however, which alarms me much more than any aggression of a foreign sovereign.

"Clergymen of our own church, who have subscribed the Thirty-nine Articles, and acknowledged in explicit terms the Queen's supremacy, have been the most forward in leading their flocks, ` step by step, to the very verge of the precipice.' The honour paid to saints, the claim of infallibility for the church, the superstitious use of the sign of the cross, the muttering of the liturgy so as to disguise the language in which it is written, the recommendation of auricular confession, and the administration of penance and absolution-all these things are pointed out by clergymen of the Church of England as worthy of adoption.

"I have little hope that the propounders and framers of these innovations will desist from their insidious course. But I rely with confidence on the people of England, and I will not bate a jot of heart or hope so long as the glorious principles and the immortal martyrs of the Reformation shall be held in reverence by the great mass of a nation, which looks with contempt on the mummeries of superstition, and with scorn at the laborious endeavours which are now making to confine the intellect, and enslave the soul."

In the meantime the Bishop of London issued an impressive and explicit manifesto on the subject, and was followed in the same style, with a still more marked development of Protestant evangelical sentiment, by the amiable Archbishop of Canterbury. There was, in the meanwhile, a strange conjunction of events of another class, and of a nature exceedingly adapted to illustrate the genius and the spirit of Popery-events so appropriate and so opportune as to strike observers with the conviction that they were part of the great system of means which was being employed by the Most High to awaken the Protestants of Great Britain to a sense of their danger, and thus to prompt them to preserve the principles of their common faith. This, by reaching the courts of law, acquired a prominence, which was necessary to their proper effect on the public mind.

The general question of Papal aggression was in due course brought before the Imperial Parliament, where, notwithstanding a considerable variety of sentiment among individuals, not remarkable for either their piety or their Protestantism, there was yet a vast amount of unanimity with respect to the Pope; and to crown the whole there has been, and there still is, a most significant movement going forward on the part of the laymen of the Established Church which promises, at a future day, to be productive of good and great results.

But the hopes thus cherished have not been realized; we regret to say, that the prospects of Rome are only too bright. The eyes of the nation are not yet opened, and her mighty heart cannot be said to be stirred within her; she sees not her danger, and is at no pains to put on her strength to avert it. The career of the Romish church has, after all, received no check. Her hierarchal project has-not. been overthrown. The measure carried in Parliament was so much make-believe. The Popish bishops laugh it to scorn, and pursue their course as if it had no existence.

Everywhere the ministers of the gospel, both in and out of the Establishments, seemed to have been awakened to a sense of their duty, and to the perils of their common Protestantism. The Press, too, was aroused to a conviction of its duty; and - both in the way of regular authorship, and through periodical organs, it put forth its tremendous power in repelling the common enemy. Still he patiently laboured on, till now his strength is more than trebled.

But what of the Continent, and of other lands? There, we think, there are grounds for some slender hope. There is France, which throughout many ages was, as prophecy had pointed out, the right arm of Papal power. Popery is not there, it is true, overthrown; but still it is only in -a limited sense to be viewed as the established religion of the country. It is under the complete control of the government, and certainly the loss it sustained by the subversion of the monarchy of Louis Phillippe and the expulsion of the royal family is very great, and the priests feel it to be so.

The part performed by the Republican armies at Rome in restoring the Pope and suppressing infant liberty-even that, great and mournful as was the deed, is but a poor compensation for the loss sustained in the exile of the queen of the French, for many years the guardian angel of the Romish priesthood in this country, and more especially during the latter period of her husband's reign. We consider, therefore, that the hold of Popery in France has been exceedingly loosened, and a great step has been gained towards its ultimate destruction; more especially is this the case with the enlarged religious liberty of the land under the empire, which, although still defective, is a mighty improvement upon the state of things in the days of the monarchy. Napoleon III. knows the Vatican, and despises it.

Then as to Austria and Prussia, by no means is the position of the Popedom improved there; on the contrary, although in both cases the thrones of the sovereigns have been maintained; and the priesthood has not been wrenched from its original position, yet there have been implanted in the popular mind opinions which are exceedingly adverse to the permanent reign of Papal absolutism, and which will in the end overturn the Vatican.

In the smaller states of Germany, those that were visited by revolutionary tempests, the same causes to a considerable extent, an extent proportionate to the numbers of the population, have been followed by the same effects. In a word, throughout the Continent we conceive the revolutions of 1848-9 have most materially contributed to loosen the hold of the Vatican upon the nations, and to hasten the day for which all godly men are looking and longing.

The last and greatest triumph is in Italy. There the temporal power of the Pope is well-nigh destroyed, the monasteries are being uprooted, and liberty, both civil and religious, is established; Bibles are sold in the streets, the press is free, and the gospel is preached without let or hindrance. Are not these tokens that the end is approaching?

Then, with respect to America, it is an ascertained fact, that there every effort is being made by the priesthood, and the States-more especially the elder States-begin to be alarmed, and serious fears are entertained for the consequences of the policy which the Vatican is pursuing. It has recently appeared, on good authority, that they are making it a special study how to distribute little colonies of Catholics in all the new territories, with a view to anticipate population, and get the start of the Protestants, and to pollute the waters of the truth at the fountain.

These circumstances have much, very much, to do with the emigration which is going on in Ireland. It is now clear that it is not mere want of bread that is prompting this continued stream of emigration. The priests deem Ireland safe; it is all their own. The object, therefore, of the priesthood is, in conjunction with the Vatican, and in concurrence with the hierarchy of Ireland, as much as may be, to draw off the waters of this mighty lake of the Papacy to fill the new reservoirs being everywhere created across the Atlantic.

Dr. Brownlee, of New York, in his masterly work on Popery in America, remarks on this subject thus:

"No great pains have been taken to conceal the facts in this matter. We have every evidence but the open confession of the conspirators. Some of the prime movers have made striking avowals. Bishop England, in a circular published in Ireland, shows that there is an organized system of means in operation to throw in upon us immense bodies of Popish emigrants. And in his late address, issued after his return from Europe, he states that `France and Germany aid the Roman Catholic missions in America.' `The Leopoldine Institution continues to feel an interest in our concerns,' adds he. `Rome has this year contributed to our extraordinary expenses. Even the Holy Father aids us from his private purse.'

"Charles X., when on the throne of France, gave frank utterance to his cordial co-operation with Austria. ` To educate and convert America,' said his minister, in his published report, p. 89, `independent of its purely spiritual design, IS OF GREAT

POLITICAL INTEREST.'

America begins to feel the power of Popery in matters political. Dr. Brownlee remarks: -

"The Papists, we have seen, are duly organized by the Jesuits. Our unbounded freedom granted to all sects, gives dangerous facilities to foreign tacticians, who chose to operate on us, under the mask of Holy Religion. This sect has an admirable capacity for stratagem. One word from Vienna moves the Pope; his Holiness' rescript moves the Archbishop of Baltimore; his circular, in his turn, moves each bishop here in twenty-four hours; and each bishop rules the priests, and the priests the people, absolutely and promptly, as does any captain his battalion of soldiers.

"And it is a fact, that they avail themselves of all these facilities. The Roman Catholics, as a religious sect, move in a body in politics. Everybody sees it in all our cities. Their bishops have been heard to boast how many votes they can bring to the polls. It is no uncommon thing for the priest, after mass, to name the candidate from the altar, whom he commands his flock to support at the polls. I have in my possession a letter signed by two eminent citizens of Monroe County, Michigan, setting forth that this was the practice of the priests there, and that tickets were prepared by the Papists, of some particular colour, so that each voter might be duly watched by the priests' spies at the polls.

"Now, does every American citizen see that these tools, manufactured by popery-these men of ‘the mob spirit’-have actually begun their operations against us? What an appalling increase of crime, turbulence, pauperism, and brutal mobs every year! Look around you, and behold! What are the elements of these mobs on the railroads in Maryland and New York? Foreign Papists! Who caused the mobs of Philadelphia? Foreign Papists! Who caused the mobs at our elections? Foreign Papists! Who caused the mob and riot at the Broadway Hall, to put down free discussion? Foreign Papists! Who caused the unjustifiable riot of Charleston? The proud and impudent defiance given forth to public sentiment by vicious foreign Papists, from their den of pollution! Who dared ridicule our laws and government with this taunt, that `This system of government may be very fine in theory, very fit for imitation on the part of those who seek the power of the mob, in contradistinction to justice and the public interest; but this republic is not of a nature to invite the reflecting part of the world, and shows at least that it has faults. A public officer, in England, who would publicly avow a fear of executing his duty, and carrying into effect the law of the realm, ought to be, and would be, thrust from his office by public opinion. This one fact is condemnation of THE SYSTEM OF AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS, CONFIRMED LATELY BY NUMEROUS OTHER PROOFS!' Who uttered this outrageous and treasonable insult on our American institutions? One of the Pope's subjects, the editor of the Cincinnati Catholic Telegraph! Who holds it in his power to let loose mobs onus at his will? ` I told him,' said the Lady Superior on her oath, I that Bishop Fenwick's influence over 10,000 brave Irishmen might lead to the destruction of his property, and that of others!' Who controlled the mobs of Maryland by a word, when the civil power was really not able to do it? The priest, a subject of a foreign power! Who has dared to enact civil laws, and impose them on Indians, in our land? This clique of foreign Papists. ‘On the 5th of August, 1832,’ says Baraga, in his letters to his masters in Austria, ‘the R. C. bishop called in the chiefs of the Ottawas, and made known to them some civil laws which he had made for them. The Indians received them with pleasure, and promised solemnly to obey them. The Romish missionary and chiefs administer these laws.’ Who insulted a senator of Ohio, for refusing to uncover his head before a Romish bishop, vociferating, ‘Hats off! the bishop is coming?’ A mob of foreign Papists at Cincinnati! Who have their dungeon cells under their cathedrals, in which they claim, as inquisitors of their own diocese, to imprison free men in our republic? Foreign popish bishops! And the facts respecting a man being so confined and scourged, in the cells at Baltimore, until he recanted, have been published, and not to this day contradicted! Who compel their pupils to kneel in the dust before lordly priests; and to kiss the floor, and the feet of their lady superiors? The foreign Papists do it daily in their seminaries, to crush the spirits of free republicans! Who are in the habit of uttering ferocious threats ‘to assassinate and burn up’ those Protestants who successfully oppose Romanism? The foreign Papists! I have in my possession the evidence of no less than six such inhuman threatenings against myself. Who are in the habit of bullying and insulting native Americans, and loudly boasting that in a short time the Catholics will have the power, and that the effectual plans are now in full operation to give them the complete victory over the Yankees? Foreign Papists, even of the poorest and most ignorant classes; and who, therefore, can have learned these things only from their spiritual guides!

Then, as to Polynesia, some years back the ground for fear was considerable, and but for the subversion of the French monarchy, it is probable these fears would have proved but too well founded. As it is, possession has been taken of several islands, and much mischief has been done to the work of Christian missions; but the conduct of the French has been such in Tahiti, and in the other islands, and the people have been so thoroughly prepared by the Protestant missionary, that the prospects of Rome are, perhaps, nowhere darker than in those islands. There is no likelihood of advance beyond what has been already made, which amounts to very little. The French possess the island, they dictate the terms of residence alike to the English missionaries and the natives, but religiously they possess no power whatever. The recent outrage in Lifu has been disowned by the Government of France, and the Emperor, under his own hand, has given an assurance to the societies of England, that their missions shall not be molested.
The Inquisition
None can tell the amount of property confiscated through its means, the amount of blood directly and indirectly shed, and the extent to which it upheld the Popedom by inspiring terror throughout society.
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

THE Inquisition! This terrible word still falls heavily on the ears of mankind, and in Popish countries strikes a measure of terror into the hearts of the people; but in the palmy days of Popery, it was only another name for the mouth of hell! Most of the senior portion of the living generation whose reading lay in the direction of matters ecclesiastical, remember how their hair stood on end as they perused and pondered the terrible narratives of its cruelty and crime.

That such a system could have sprung out of Popery only serves to show the character of the fountain whence such a stream emanated, or of the furnace whence such a spark was emitted. It required prodigious iniquity to give it birth, to arrange its complex machinery, and to carry on its murderous labours!

It also serves as an index to the condition of human knowledge, and the state of public liberty in Europe during many ages. Such an institution was wholly incompatible with the existence of one iota of freedom, and sure it is, just as liberty has increased, its dominion has been abridged, although it is an indisputable fact that the Inquisition is not extinct, but exists and operates with considerable power at the present moment. It arose in the dark ages, and beginning its labours, it carried them on with a high hand for many generations.

None can tell the amount of property confiscated through its means, the amount of blood directly and indirectly shed, and the extent to which it upheld the Popedom by inspiring terror throughout society.

The system, thrice accursed, was extended, in 1571, to the western dominions of Spain, where, after working much evil in other parts of that kingdom, it might be said to concentrate its powers of mischief. But it is impossible, nor is it our object in so brief a space, to give a full view of the history and working of this infernal machine. It seizes its victims in the light, and it crushes their spirits in darkness!

Who shall tell the tale of its pulley, its rack, its firepan, and its wheel? Who shall tell the number of its victims, recount their bitter tears, and broken hearts? Who shall describe the character and the conduct of the Inquisitors, their rapacity, licentiousness and cruelty? There is, perhaps, no light in which the worst attributes of human nature have been ever so impressively and appallingly displayed, as in the doings of these men. The tale of each successive day was but a fresh chapter of horror and abomination.

They who have read the popular histories of it in Spain, and also at Goa, and the narrative of its opening by the armies of Napoleon in 1808, will understand us; and they who are aware of its re-establishment by the infamous Ferdinand, will see that while French liberalism opened its gates, Spanish despotism, true to its habits and its instincts, hastened once more to close them, and to re-establish the atrocious system that bad there so long prevailed to the affliction of Spain, the terror of Europe, and the disgrace of humanity.

The object of this chapter is simply to connect it with the Popedom as an acknowledged institution, as a prized machine, as one of the prime ornaments of its mediaeval glory. We would impress the mind of the reader with the fact that an Inquisition still exists, and is in vigorous operation, although with more care than formerly. The instrument is worthy of the system to which it belongs; but it is surely an approach to the climax of impiety to connect such an institution with a chair which boasts to have been primarily occupied by the Apostle Peter! The subject is so full of all that is harrowing and revolting, that our soul recoils from it. Peter an Inquisitor! Peter, the President of the Inquisition! The idea is preposterous.

The Inquisition was introduced to Spain about the year 1232 when Pope Gregory IX. caused inquiries to be made concerning heretics, and appointed inquisitors to proceed against them. The dreadful work went on till the year 1474, when Isabella ascended the throne.

After this local inquisitions were established, chiefly at the request of the sovereigns of the various states, it having previously been customary for inquisitors to make periodical visitations, and to hold courts of inquiry. The history of the modern inquisition of Spain dates from the commencement of the reigns of Ferdinand and Isabella, 'of which by far the most complete account has been given by Llorente, the substance of which may briefly be stated. There are various classes of crimes against which the Inquisition proceeded. We cite the following:

The Inquisition also proceeded against concealers, favourers, and adherents of heretics, as being suspected of professing the same opinions. The seventh class was, composed of all those who opposed the Inquisition, and prevented the inquisitors from exercising their functions.

The eighth class comprehended those nobles who refused to take an oath to drive the heretics from their states. The ninth class consisted of governors of kingdoms, provinces, and towns, who did not defend the Church against heretics, when they were required by the Inquisition. The tenth class comprised those who refused to repeal the statutes in force in towns and cities, when they were contrary to the measures decreed by the Holy Office. The eleventh class of suspected persons embraced all lawyers, notaries, and other persons belonging to the law, who assisted heretics by their advice, or concealed papers, records, or other writings, which might make their errors, dwellings, or stations known. In the twelfth class of suspected, were those persons who had given ecclesiastical sepulture to known heretics. Those who refused to take an oath in the trials of heretics, when they were required to do it, were also liable to suspicion. The fourteenth class were deceased persons, who had been denounced as heretics. The Popes, in order to make heresy more odious, had decreed that the bodies of dead heretics should be disinterred and burnt, their property confiscated, and their memory pronounced infamous. The same suspicion fell upon writings which contained heretical doctrines, or which might lead to them. Lastly, the Jews and Moors were considered as subject to the Holy Office, when they engaged Catholics to embrace their faith, either by their writings or discourse.

"Although all the persons guilty of the crimes above-mentioned were under the jurisdiction of the Holy Office, yet the Pope, his legates, nuncios, officers, and familiars, were exempt; and if any of these were denounced as heretics, the Inquisition could only take the secret information and refer it to the Pope. Bishops were also exempt, but kings had not that privilege."

"As the bishops were the ordinary inquisitors by divine right, it seems just that they should have had the power of receiving information’s, and proceeding against the apostolical inquisitors in matters of faith; but the Pope rendered his delegates independent, by decreeing that none but an apostolical inquisitor could proceed against another. The inquisitor and the bishop acted together, but each had the right of pursuing heretics separately. The orders for imprisonment could only be issued by both together, and if they did not accord, they referred to the Pope. The inquisitors could require the assistance of secular power in the exercise of their authority, and it could not be refused without incurring the punishment of excommunication and suspicion of heresy. The bishop was obliged to lend his house for the prisoners; besides this, the inquisitors had a particular prison to secure the persons of the accused."

These things are matters of history, but we should fail of our duty did we not call attention to facts which have occurred in our own day. Dr. Buchanan, the celebrated Indian missionary, paid a visit in 1808 to Goa, once so famous as the seat of a branch of the Inquisition. Goa is a place of which the world knows but little, but it has claims to notice. The province comprised two hundred churches and chapels, and upwards of two thousand priests.

The doctor was anxious to obtain some knowledge of the state of things in the Inquisition, and accordingly he put himself in communication with certain Italian Jesuits; and this brought him into contact with the inquisitor, with whom he breakfasted almost daily, while he passed his evenings in the doctor's apartment. The chief inquisitor at last turns up, and further developments are perceived by the stranger.

On the following day the doctor writes:

28 January 1808.

This morning, after breakfast, my host went to dress for the Holy Office, and soon returned in his inquisitorial robes. He said he would go half an hour before the usual time, for the purpose of showing me the Inquisition. I thought that his countenance was more severe than usual, and that his attendants were not so civil as before. The truth was, the midnight scene (An uproar in the gallery of the convent one night, which the doctor at first feared might be made by his servants, whom he supposed in the act of being dragged to the dungeons of the Holy office; but which, in reality, arose from the cries of a boy, who believed he had seen a spectre.) was still on my mind.

The Inquisition is about a quarter of a mile from the convent, and we proceeded thither in our manjeels (a kind of palankeen). On our arrival at the place the inquisitor said to me, as we were ascending the steps of the outer stair, that he hoped I should be satisfied with a transient view of the Inquisition, and that I would retire whenever he should desire it. I took this as a good omen, and followed my conductor with tolerable confidence.

He first led me to the great hall of the Inquisition. We were met at the door by a number of well-dressed persons, who, I afterwards understood, were the familiars of the Holy Office. They bowed very low to the inquisitor, and looked with surprise at me. The great hall is the place in which the prisoners are marshalled for the procession of the auto da fe. At the procession described by Dellon, in which he himself walked barefoot, clothed with the painted garment, there were upwards of one hundred and fifty prisoners.

I traversed this hall for some time with a slow step, reflecting on its former scenes, the inquisitor walking by my side in silence I thought of the fate of the multitude of my fellow-creatures who had passed through this place, condemned by a tribunal of their fellow sinners, their bodies devoted to the flames, and their souls to perdition. And I could not help saying to him, ' Would not the holy church wish, in her mercy, to have those souls back again, that she might allow them a little further probation?' The inquisitor answered nothing, but beckoned me to go with him to a door at one end of the hall. By this door he conducted me to some small rooms, and thence to the spacious apartments of the chief inquisitor.

Having surveyed these, he brought me back again to the great hall; and I thought he seemed now desirous that I should depart. ` Now, father,' said I, `lead me to the dungeons below; I want to see the captives.' ` No,' said he, `that cannot be.' I now began to suspect that it had been in the mind of the inquisitor, from the beginning, to show me only a certain part of the Inquisition, in the hope of satisfying my inquiries in a general way. I urged him with earnestness but he steadily resisted, and seemed to be offended, or rather agitated, by my importunity.

I intimated to him plainly that the only way to do justice to his own assertions and arguments regarding the present state of the Inquisition was to show me the prisons and the captives. I should then describe only what I saw, but now the subject was left in awful obscurity. `Lead me down,' said I, ` to the inner building; and let me pass through the two hundred dungeons, ten feet square, described by your former captives. Let me count the number of your present captives, and converse with them. I want to see if there be any subjects of the British government, to whom we owe protection. I want to ask how long they have been here, how long it is since they beheld the light of the sun, and whether they ever expect to see it again. Show me the chamber of torture, and declare what modes of execution or of punishment are now practised within the walls of the Inquisition, in lieu of the public auto da fe If, after all that has passed, father, you resist this reasonable request, I shall be justified in believing that you are afraid of exposing the real state of the Inquisition in India.

To these observations, the inquisitor made no reply, but seemed impatient that I should withdraw. ` My good father,' said I, ` I am about to take leave of you, and to thank you for your hospitable attentions-it had been before understood that I should take my final leave at the door of the Inquisition-and I wish always to preserve on my mind a favourable sentiment of your kindness and candour. You cannot, you say, show me the captives and the dungeons; be pleased, then, merely to answer this question, for I shall believe your word. How many prisoners are there now below in the cells of the Inquisition?' The inquisitor replied, `That is a question which I cannot answer.' On his pronouncing these words I retired hastily towards the door, and wished him farewell. We shook hands with as much cordiality as we could at the moment assume, and both of us, I believe, were sorry that our parting took place with a clouded countenance."

The discoveries made by the armies of the First Napoleon on taking Karne and opening the Inquisition are well known, but the abomination was restored. The revolution at Rome in 1819 was the means of opening the Inquisition there, to the gaze of an astonished world. For the accommodation of the military it was intended to modify one of the convents, and in the course of the work human bones were found, and a trap-door discovered.

This led to excavations being made, and further discoveries of human bones. Digging deeper still the workmen lighted upon a vault, where a great number of human skeletons were found; some of them so close together and so amalgamated with lime, that no bone could be moved without being broken.

In another vault was found a vast quantity of black rich earth, mixed with pieces of decayed animal matter, and human hair of such length as to lead to the belief that it belonged to women rather than to men. From the manner in which the skeletons found in the vaults were placed, it was evident that they must have been deposited there since the erection of the edifice, which was within a period of less than twenty-four years.

The bones of such a multitude of human beings, supplies volumes touching the doings of the so-called Holy Office. The full history of the dread place, however, will not be known till the day which will reveal the hidden things of dishonesty.
Popish Confirmation
The danger to our Protestantism is increasing every hour, and it behoves those that desire to preserve what remains, to drive the enemy from the gate, and to rid themselves without a moment's loss of time of the Popish Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation.
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

CONFIRMATION is a sacrament of Popery, which, it is stated, "confers grace," and without which there can be no salvation, and this is to be received under pain of anathema! While Baptism gives spiritual life, Confirmation imparts strength, and of a spiritual child makes a spiritual man.

The administration of the rite is gone about much in the same way as that of baptism. The Bishop anoints the forehead with chrism, saying, "I sign thee with the sign of the Cross, and confirm thee with the chrism of Salvation," at the same time gently slapping him on the cheek, "to remind him that as a courageous champion he must be prepared to brave with unconquered resolution all adversities for the name of Christ."

It might be supposed that confirmation was a less safe matter than baptism, as an experiment on public credulity, on account of the more advanced years of the subjects of it; but from the pains Popery takes to withhold the Sacred Scriptures, and to keep its youth in a state of spiritual ignorance, it has little to fear from years. Accordingly the matter is not minced in the "Instructions and Devotions for Confirmation," used at this moment among the English Papists, as the following will show:

"Confirmation is a sacrament instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ, to make us perfect Christians, and it is so called because it gives to them that receive it, if duly disposed, a great inward strength, a holy vigour of spirit, and firm constancy of mind for the exact discharging every duty that belongs to the Christian life, and happily finishes in them, that which baptism had begun, making them of infants in Christianity, to become perfect men."(Instruction for Confirmation, p. 4.)

Now, this language is, at any rate, intelligible; and whether it be correct or not, may also easily be determined. The making a person a perfect Christian is a great work, which is not to be effected when he is asleep, or without his cognizance; he who receives "inward strength, a holy vigour of spirits, and firm constancy of mind," must be conscious of the wonderful work, the mighty change that has been effected in him; nor will he alone be aware of the fact, since it will never fail to make itself externally manifest to all beholders.

But is it really so in respect to Popish Confirmation? We refer the inquirer, for an answer, full and unerring, to Popish society in Great Britain and Ireland, on the Continent of Europe, and all over the world. The allegation is equally at variance with reason, with Scripture, with experience, and with observation.

Who ever met a sensible Papist, who professed to have been the subject of this wonderful change, bringing light, strength, and vigour to his soul, through the imposition of the Bishop's hands? It is altogether a deadly delusion, a lying fable, eminently calculated to further the destruction of mankind! The "strength" it imparts, if any, is that of blind confidence; the "vigour of spirit" is suicidal presumption!

This sacrament of Confirmation, so- called, is a thing wholly unknown to the Word of God. In the New Testament there is not a tittle on which it can be based; it is a pure creation of Popish craft. The word confirmation is not unknown to the Scriptures; there was such a thing as confirmation in the days of the Apostles; but no two things on earth can be more unlike each other than Apostolic and, Popish Confirmation.

The one was a reality, the other is a fiction. The one was effected by the truth of the gospel, the other through an exhibition of unmeaning mummery. Nothing can be more simple than Apostolic Confirmation; it was effected by the Holy Spirit, solely and uniformly through the truth. Paul, 1 Cor. i. 6., says, "Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you;" "the testimony of Christ," meaning the gospel, the thing believed concerning Christ, the Divine Head. It was "confirmed," that is, proved to be of God, by the miraculous powers conferred upon believers; "so that ye come behind in no gifts, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall also confirm you unto the end."

Here, then, we have a two-fold confirmation; first, of God's testimony to man; and secondly, of man's faith in that testimony, and both by the same means. Again, "they," the Apostles, "went forth to preach everywhere, the Lord working with them, confirming the Word by signs following."

"Confirming the Word." What does this mean? It can only mean one thing-proving the Divine origin of the Word by the signs, wonders, and mighty deeds, done by the Spirit of God. Thus the Apostles confirmed Christ's mission from God, and their own mission from Christ. Again, the Apostles came to Antioch confirming the souls of the disciples," and exhorting them to continue in the faith. To "confirm the souls," and "strengthen the faith" of the disciples, by which it is realized, meant the same thing. No ceremony whatever was connected with the deed.

We hold Popish Confirmation, then, and Popish Baptism, to be a great and dangerous delusion; and it will be seen from the definitions given that they are simply two stages of the same process; the first giving spiritual life in all its parts, and the second developing those parts into maturities.

We consider these errors as most deadly and would earnestly warn the people of England against them, and beseech them not to be dazzled with dignities, cardinals, princes, and popes, but to rise superior to the idolatry of -wealth, splendour, and great names, and to do homage to nothing but the truth of God set forth in the Holy Scriptures.

The time is come, when the people of England must take their stand on Revelation, and with the sword of the Spirit be "valiant for the truth," fighting the battles of Gospel verity and Christian freedom, as did their fathers. The danger to our Protestantism is increasing every hour, and it behoves those that desire to preserve what remains, to drive the enemy from the gate, and to rid themselves without a moment's loss of time of the Popish Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation.
Popish Baptism
"If any one denies that the guilt of original sin is remitted by the grace of Christ, which is conferred in baptism . . . . let him be accursed."
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

BAPTISM is the first of the Seven Sacraments of Popery, and the manner in which it is dealt with, is a fair specimen of the manner in which Popery deals with everything, whether based on the Scriptures or on the authority of the Church. It is first to be noted then, that it is declared to be "absolutely necessary to salvation." It is broadly laid down, that "without Baptism the Atonement of the Cross cannot be applied to us; that Christ will not redeem us unless we are washed in the waters of baptism, and that no man can be justified by faith only without Baptism." (Maguire Dis. p. 151.)

These absurd pretences are stamped, as usual, with artifice and mystery. The nonsense of them need not be pointed out to the well-instructed reader, who will see that the redemption of souls by Christ, whose work it seems is still to be performed, is to depend upon their being baptized, and, consequently, through that baptism brought into a state which renders such redemption unnecessary! But it were absurd to argue against such folly.

The simple institution of Christ is not to the taste of the ignorant multitude that form the subjects of the Popedom; they think "it is not done well, nor orderly, unless they see conjuration, unless they hallow the water, unless there be oil, salt, spittle, tapers, and such other dumb ceremonies serving no use." (Homily for Whitsunday)

Here, again, the great object is clearly to exalt the priest, and to dazzle the people. An ordinance on which the salvation of a soul is made to depend, must be a very important thing; without pomp, and ceremony, and mystery, somewhat corresponding with the magnitude of the effect to be produced, even the vulgar might be led to question whether any such effect could flow from means so simple, and thus reach conclusions that might prove inconvenient to the priesthood.

The Council of Trent has a vast, even more than a usual amount of cursing, upon this subject. No fewer than fourteen anathemas are poured forth upon the heads of those who shall dare to manifest a little common sense, and venture even to hint a doubt on any of the dogmas of the Church concerning it.

From the importance which attaches to this subject, it is proper to set forth in full the doctrine as it is propounded in the Canons and the Catechisms of the Council of Trent, and the "Poor Man's Catechism," a great authority. Speaking of infant baptism, the last publication says: " If any one denies that the merit of Jesus Christ is applied to little ones by the sacrament of. baptism, let him be accursed."-Canones, Sess. v., "Decretum de Peccato."

"If any one denies that infants are to be baptized, let him be accursed. "-.Ib.

The Catholic form of baptism is as follows: -

"At the church-door the infant is stopped, to signify that being yet a slave to the devil, he cannot enter' the church, and that baptism gives him entrance."-Poor Man's Catechism.

"The priest then says" to the infant "What do you demand from the church of God?" -Ib.

"Then he breathes in his face three times, and commands the devil to depart, and give place to the Holy Ghost."-Ib.

"He then makes the sign of the cross."-Ib. The forehead, eyes, breast, shoulders, ears, are signed with the sign of the cross.

"The priest now blesses salt, and puts some of it into his mouth."-Ib.

"The priest proceeds to read the exorcism, commanding the wicked spirit to depart." - Ib. "Exorcism follows, which is accomplished to expel the devil and to break his strength." ("Sequitur exorcismus, qui ad expellendum diabolum ejusque vires frangendas . . . . conficitur."-Cat. II. ii. 64.)

"Laying the stole upon the child, he leads him into the church."-Ib.

"The priest repeats the exorcism."-Ib.

"He touches the ears and nostrils with spittle." -Ib.

The priest asks the infant these three things "Do you renounce Satan. and all his works? and all his pomps?" -lb.

"Then he" (the infant) "is anointed with the holy oils, blessed by the bishop, on the breast and between the shoulders."-Ib.

"Next he " (the infant) "is examined as to his faith: -Do you believe in God the Father Almighty?" etc.-Ib.

"Then the priest asks the infant, Will you be baptized; and the reason assigned is: -the Lord has willed that no one should be enlisted in the number of his followers, except as a volunteer. Then he pours water on the head three times in the form of a cross. Then he anoints the top of the head with chrism."-Ib.

"Then he puts white linen on the infant's head. A lighted candle is afterwards put into his hand; and, lastly, the infant receives usually the name of some Saint, ` to whom he may pray, and of whom he may hope that he will come to defend both his soul and his body."' ("Quem imitari studeat, eum quoque precetur et speret sibi advocatum ad salutem tum animi, tum corporis defendendam venturum esse."-Cat. II. ii. 73.)

The effects of baptism are thus set forth:

"By baptism, putting on Christ, we are made a new creature in him, obtaining the full and perfect remission of all sins."- Canones, Sess. xiv., cap. 2. "Even little ones are baptized unto the remission of sins that in them the evil which they contracted by generation may be cleansed by regeneration." Canones, Sess. v., "De Peccato."

"If any one denies that the guilt of original sin is remitted by the grace of Christ, which is conferred in baptism . . . . let him be accursed."-Ib.

"In baptism not only are sins remitted, but all the punishments of sin are also done away."-Cat. II. ii. 44.

"The causes of justification are, the final (cause), the glory of God; the instrumental (cause), the sacrament of baptism."-Canones, Sess. vi. cap. 7.

"If any one shall say that little ones, after they have been baptized, are not to be reckoned amongst believers . . .. let him be accursed."-Ib. Sess. vii. can. 13.

"By baptism we are joined to Christ, the head, as his members."-Cat. II. ii. 51. "By the virtue of this sacrament, our mind is filled with grace, through which being rendered just and the children of God, we are constituted heirs of eternal salvation."-Ib. 49.

"Lastly, baptism opens to each of us the way to heaven."-Ib. 57.

In short, baptism is a sacrament by which infants are "cleansed from original sin," "made Christians," "born again," "born of God," "adopted children of God," and "heirs of the kingdom of heaven."

"Is baptism necessary to salvation? Yes; without it we cannot enter into the kingdom of God." "It is the first and most necessary of all the sacraments. For Christ has said, Unless a man be born again of water and of the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. And the church has defined that no one can be saved, unless he be baptized, either actually or in desire." Which law (John iii. 5.) is to be understood not of adults alone, but also of infants." ("Quam legem non solum de its qui adulta Ttate sunt, sed etiam de pueris infantibus intelligendum esse, communis Patrum sententiaconfirmat."-Cat. II. H. 31.)

Such is the Romish doctrine of Baptism, which constitutes one of the most egregious errors of the Papal Church. The ingenuity of man seems to have been taxed to the uttermost to invest the ordinance with an artificial importance and a meretricious glare in the eyes of the multitude.

The marvel is, that both great and small did not, from the first, rise against the outrage on delicacy, decency, Scripture, and common sense. The mother of King James shows that there were those, in a later day, whose eyes were partially opened to the abomination.

The King tells us a curious story about his own baptism, in the Premonition, before his apology for the Oath of Allegiance, he says: "The Queen, my mother, of worthy memory, though she continued in the religion in which she was nourished, yet was she so far from being superstitious therein, that at my baptism, although I was baptized by a Popish Archbishop, she sent him word to forbear the use of the spittle, being indeed, a filthy, apish trick, rather in scorn than imitation of Christ; and her own very words were, that she `would not have a debauched priest to spit in her child's mouth."'

Every well-taught Protestant knows that baptism by whomsoever administered, has no power in any way to affect immortal mind. It cannot regenerate -that is, quicken from a death of trespasses and of sins-enlighten, convince, and convert the human soul. Regeneration is effected solely by the Holy Spirit through the Gospel of Christ, and justification, is solely by faith, and not by baptism. Adoption proceeds from the mercy of God, through faith in the Lord Jesus; and has no connection whatever with Baptism.

It is worthy of notice that the Eastern Church largely participates with the Western, in heaping abuses on the ordinance of Baptism. The author of "Egypt's Princes," makes the following extraordinary statement:

"I have never, before or since, witnessed the rite administered as it then was. It was reduplicated. The first time it was mostly in Arabic. The mother, taking the child and facing the west, renounced in the name of the child, the devil, and his works and service, and then turning to the east, embraced the Saviour, and his righteousness and service. Three times the priest asked her, ` Do you embrace Christ for this child ?' and three times she emphatically answered, ` I do.' The priest then sprinkled water on the child, and I thought the ceremony was completed. But the two children were then taken to another part of the church, where was a font large enough for their immersion, and another priest completed the ceremony, this time all in Coptic. The children were stripped naked, and with long repetitions of prayers, they were three times immersed in the font, and then the priest commenced the process of anointing them with holy oil, which he did by dipping his thumb into the oil, and then commencing at the wrist of the child, tracing it along all its members and joints. The church was so cold that we needed our heavy shawls around us to keep warm, and the priest was an old trembling man, awkward in his manipulations; and as the poor things lay there on a garment on the ground, blue and screaming, until, utterly exhausted, they could cry no longer, I became so indignant that I could hardly restrain myself from interfering. I could no longer wonder that (as the Copts say is the case) the children are often killed by the process."

If these doctrines be true, assuredly the Papists throughout all the world ought to be shining patterns of every virtue. Every Catholic is taught to say that "the end for which Baptism was instituted, was to make us Christians; to free us from the slavery of Satan, under which we come into the world; to unite us with Christ as members of his body, to give us a heart to receive all the other sacraments; and a title to an eternal and happy inheritance in heaven." (Keenan, p. 157.)

It would be very difficult to put a larger amount of deadly error and impious falsehood into so small a space; every form of the sentence is a gross and fatal misrepresentation. The work of Christ, the truth of the Gospel and the offices of the Spirit in applying it to the souls of men, and the grace of God in the glorious dispensations of mercy, all are merged in Popish Baptism. The doctrine would be utterly contemptible, were it not for the awful consequences, which are said to flow from it.

It is throughout, altogether false, and is such a perversion, such a caricature of the institution of Christ, as to forfeit on behalf of those who teach it, all confidence among mankind. The fabrication of such a lesson of delusion must have been most deliberate, and its authors must have been fully conscious of their own guilt in the act; in speaking so glaring a lie, they spoke it of themselves. There is not in the Word of God, the slightest foundation for the representation, which they have given, and not only given but enforced on the faith of men, under the penalty of damnation! No created mind can tell the amount of eternal ruin to souls, which has arisen from this pestilent doctrine, which merits all the anathemas that can be heaped upon it, by both earth and heaven!

It is matter of regret, that a portion of the Popish leaven upon this subject has crept into divers portions of the Protestant Church, from which it cannot be too speedily purged out, since it lies at the foundation of the Romish system, the very essence of which is the doctrine of salvation, not through the Gospel but through the sacraments dispensed by men in so-called Apostolic succession.
Literary Policy Of Rome
Among the prohibited books, a conspicuous place is assigned to the Bible, especially to the English version of it.
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

FREEDOM of speech, and freedom of publication, are among the birthrights of Englishmen, and rank with the choicest blessings of which this happy country has to boast. In this respect, no land is comparable to the kind we live in. There is nothing which an Englishman ought to say, to print, or to publish, which he may not.

It is much otherwise in some other lands, of whose glorious liberties much is heard. Englishmen, therefore, of all others, form the best tribunal to which an appeal can be presented on the subject of the liberty of the Press. Perhaps there are few lights in which Rome has been less looked at by the common people, although nothing more strikingly illustrates her true character than her conduct towards the Press.

Her Literary Policy, as set forth in her damnatory catalogues, or indexes, both prohibitory and expurgatory, furnishes one of the most extraordinary illustrations of her spirit and character that can be conceived of. They supply, an amusing test of the degrees of merit and evangelical excellence in a literary work.

It may be that some of our readers have met with the valuable and interesting publication of Mr. Hobart Seymour, a clergyman of the Established Church, entitled "Mornings among the Jesuits at Rome." That work excels most others of the same class, in its moderation and candour; and in the good feeling it displays towards the gentlemen with whom its author was in habits of intercourse; and yet it is a fact, that it has been recently honoured with a place among the books prohibited at Rome. What must be the state of things in a country which renders it unsafe to give circulation to such a book?

Among the prohibited books, a conspicuous place is assigned to the Bible, especially to the English version of it. Booksellers have been severely punished for selling, or otherwise disposing of the Word of God in the vulgar tongue indiscriminately, inasmuch as none are allowed to read it without a "written permission;" no man, therefore, who possesses a Bible will "receive absolution till he has first delivered up such Bible to the ordinary; and booksellers who shall sell or otherwise dispose of them to any person, not having such permission, shall forfeit the value of the books; while regulars shall neither read nor purchase such books without a special licence from their superiors."

What say our English readers to this? Rome has always been in fearful dread of the Word of God, and of every publication, the object of which was to explain it. The public have been taught to believe that the Scriptures are a large mass of poison calculated to taint the very air, and hence we find the Inquisitor General deeply lamenting that "some had carried their audacity to such an execrable extent, as to desire to read the Holy Scriptures in the vulgar tongue, without any fear of encountering the most mortal poison."

Thus it is that the Inquisition talks of the book, the leaves of which were sent for the healing of the nations. We need hardly say, that from the first, English authors have held a most distinguished place in the list of condemned book, It were long to give the list of the good men who are honoured with exclusion, and whose names stand upon the roll of the anathema.

While the Church of Rome owes so much to ignorance in her own community, she owes not a little to ignorance out of it. Among the points to which ignorance extends, an important place is due to the Index Expurgatorius-one of the most extraordinary illustrative documents on earth. Nothing more strikingly illustrates the true spirit of the Romish system. It is all over written with bigotry and intolerance; most impressively showing what would be the fate of the world were the priests once more to be in the ascendant.

It is to be carefully noted that this once renowned, and, in Italy, still terrible document, is by no means a dead letter, but a living power for evil; it is an accurate embodiment of the soul of the system; it is throughout stamped with the sanction of the pretended successor of St. Peter, as the supreme head of the main body.

The province of the Index Expurgatorius has been admirably managed by the Jesuits. It is sounded as with a trumpet, that this serious instrument has no authority whatever in Spain, in Portugal, in France, in Austria, in the Netherlands, or in the Popish portion of Great Britain and Ireland; and this is set forth as a proof that the power of the Pope on the Continent is gone, and that those lands have therefore nothing to fear in which the spirit of liberality reigns; and weak men, comprising a large number of the upper classes, and even of our statesmen, believe it.

Allowing that such is the fact it supplies but little ground for those nations felicitating each other. The Jesuit is there! The Popish church in most of those nations has actually an index of her own, almost a duplicate of that very Roman index prohibitory and expurgatory.

That of Spain and Portugal is even more intolerant. The Creed of Pope Pius IV. -The creed at this hour of the Roman world-holds every Catholic "to believe and profess all things defined, more especially by the Council of Trent, from which all subsequent Roman indexes followed." Whatever, therefore, be his allegations, such is his creed, and at his peril he must stand to it! Even the Maynooth Committee, in their famous examination before the Committee of the Lords in 1826, in spite of their cunning, were compelled to admit that "all Catholics will respect the prohibition of the Congregation of the Index;" that is, all Catholics will obey its high mandate denouncing the books which it denounces, and refusing to admit them into their houses. The management of this affair is mainly the business of the Jesuits, for whom it is very fit employment. But for the English Constitution, the people of this country would long since have been treated to an index of her own.

It is sufficiently shown by the Rev. Joseph Mendham (Mendham, p.xvii) that all the necessary arrangements have been made, and kept in store for the fitting hour. According to that MS. "public and private libraries must be searched and examined for books, as also all bookbinders, stationers, and booksellers' shops; and not only heretical books and pamphlets, but also profane, vain, lascivious, and other such hurtful, dangerous poisons are utterly to be removed, burned, suppressed, and severe order and punishment appointed for such as shall conceal these kinds of writings."

It is the custom of Romanists, for obvious reasons to associate bad books with the Bible and works on evangelical Religion (Part 1. chap. 9, p 9495.) The same work provides for the prospective abolition of all laws "in Prejudice to the Catholic Roman Religion, and to restore and put in full authority again all old laws that ever were in use in England in favour of the same and against errors and heretics."

Such were among the contemplated blessings of the Pope for ' England, which were only kept back by the Revolution; let no man, then, err in this matter; the same things are still in store the moment that circumstances render it practicable to introduce them. Change for the better there is none; and only the ignorant and the foolish will believe there is. Let no man, we say, deceive himself as multitudes have done and are still doing. The Council of Trent, which we have so largely quoted in the present publication, is the standard of Romish doctrine. This was frankly confessed by Archbishop Murray and Bishop Doyle in the Committee of the House of Lords aforesaid, and the celebrated Mr. Charles Butler, the barrister the ablest advocate of the Popish Church in our times-acknowledges that the Creed of the Council of Trent is "an accurate and explicit summary of the Roman Catholic Faith."

After this, we say again, let no man be deceived by those, who, from. Whatever cause, assert that Popery is reformed. There stand the decrees, the canons, and the anathemas of the Council of Trent, like the seven hills on which the emblematic monster sat in prophetic vision. To those Decrees, if we add the Index Expurgatorius, we shall have an embodiment of sentiments and of. Doctrine of a character that it cannot be gainsaid, nor resisted, which Will demonstrate in a manner the most fearful, the true nature of the system, which the Word of God has designated - the Mystery of Iniquity.
Justification
The Council of Trent: "Whoever shall affirm that men are justified solely by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, or the remission of sin to the exclusion of grace and charity, which is shed abroad in their hearts, and inheres in them; or that the grace by which we are justified is only the favour of God; let him be accursed."
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

The ground of a sinner's justification before God, is the most important subject within the whole circle of human inquiry, and none ever more beautifully and strikingly expresses it than the Prophet, in the following words: "Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and bow myself before the High God? Shall I come before Him with burnt offerings, with calves of a year old?" Popery answers this question in one way, and Protestantism in another, and on the difference depends their respective characters; every other point between the two systems as it relates to man, is comparatively unimportant, since none other comes so near to his heart and his hopes.

Now the difference between Protestantism and Popery is here so great that it admits, of neither reconciliation nor compromise. The difference is just that which subsists between the creature and the Creator; in the one case, the sinner is taught to rest for acceptance with God on his own works, and in the other, on the work of Christ.

Here, however, the peril is increased, from the fact of the use which is apparently made of the work of Christ. Entering on such a subject, it is easy to deal with Jews, Turks, or Infidels, whose systems exclude all regard to the person and offices of the Messiah; it is not so with Popery, which affects to make much of his atoning blood and righteousness, dealing most abundantly in the execration of all those who dare to deviate an iota from its dogmas.

It allows to Christ, as the Lamb of God, in words, the honour of taking away the sins of the world, but so combines these words with others as at once to divest them of their legitimate and vital import. It allows the doctrine a place, but a place such as to dishonour Him, and to show that his work is only as the dust in the balance compared with that of the sinner himself. We appeal to the highest Romish standards, the Decrees of the Council of Trent; to which the whole Papal world bows as to an authority from which there is no appeal.

According to Protestant views, the Scriptures teach that men "are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord Jesus Christ by faith, and not for their own works or deserving; wherefore, that we are justified by faith only in the most wholesome doctrine and very full of comfort." Thus spoke the authors of the Articles. Such was the doctrine of the first ages; but as Popery rose, this view gradually disappeared through the teaching of the Priesthood, till at length it was denied, and its abettors pronounced "accursed."

It was under these circumstances that Luther arose, and having found the doctrine in the Sacred Scriptures, with trumpet tongue he published it to the ends of the world. To no other subject did he give such prominence; this was the very soul and essence of his system.

The Romish edifice was throughout one stupendous pile of human works, inscribed in all its parts with human merit all pointing to the right they give to the sinner to stand on his own foundation before his God. All these works were intended to effect his justification, so that to attempt to compass that justification by any other means was to reduce the whole edifice to ruin, and utterly to destroy, root and branch, the Papal system.

Luther clave to this point as to life—"It is," said he, "the head corner-stone which supports, nay, gives existence and life to the Church of God, so that without it the Church cannot subsist for an hour." According to him, "this Christian article can never be handled and inculcated enough. If this doctrine fall and perish, the knowledge of every truth in religion will fall and perish with it. On the contrary, if this doctrine flourish, all good things will also flourish namely, true religion, the true worship of God, and the right knowledge of everything which it becomes a Christian to know."

The establishment of this doctrine was the certain destruction of the Popedom. The Papists knew it, and acted accordingly; they were prepared to move earth and hell to prevent the propagation and reception of Luther's doctrine of justification. Great were their differences in adjusting a system of error, but in fiercely opposing and vehemently denouncing both him and his doctrine, they presented the most marvellous unanimity.

In none of their many doings did they display more malignant ingenuity; nowhere did they draw more largely upon falsehood in support of error. They charged the Protestants with all sorts of absurdity, and in replying to the several objections, successively poured out their anathemas. Council succeeded Council, each adding to the error of its predecessors, till at length they completed their battlement around the Church, for entirely shutting out the righteousness of God by faith in Jesus Christ.

The lessons that Popery taught to men, on this great and preeminent subject, are, primarily, to look to himself and his own works; and, secondly, to the merits of the saints; and, thirdly, should there still be any deficiency to the work of Jesus Christ. Such was the statement of their authorized standard of doctrine upon this most momentous matter; but their practical administration of it was even worse than this, for it generally made nothing whatever of Christ's sacrifice and righteousness, but everything of man's works.

They rejected utterly and with scorn, tile idea of imputing to man the righteousness of the Son of God, or in counting and treating an individual as righteous, solely for his sake. With them "to justify" was not "to declare righteous," but "to make righteous'' and hence they found for both the people and themselves an abundance of work in their attempts to remove sin and cultivate virtue by sacraments and fastings, prayers and purgatory, and many other modes of rendering "heaven debtor to merit," as the only sure foundation of hope of eternal life.

The Council of Trent, speaking of the causes of justification, having correctly enough stated the meritorious cause, proceeds to say, "The instrumental cause, the sacrament of Baptism, is the sacrament of Faith, without which no one can ever obtain justification."

Here, then, the faith according to Popery, which justifies, comes out of Baptism; to be baptized is to be a believer, and to believe with such a faith as Baptism produces, is to be justified! The Papal Church, in its great standard of doctrine, the Decrees of the Council of Trent, follows up its deliverances by rules that "all may know not only what is to be held and followed, but also what is to be rejected and shunned." As examples, we may cite the following:

"Whoever shall affirm that the ungodly is justified by-faith only, so that it is to be understood that nothing else is to be required to co-operate therewith, in order to obtain justification; and that it is on no account necessary that he should preface and dispose himself by the effect of his own will; let him be accursed."

"Whoever shall affirm that men are justified solely by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, or the remission of sin to the exclusion of grace and charity, which is shed abroad in their hearts, and inheres in them; or that the grace by which we are justified is only the favour of God; let him be accursed."

"Whoever shall affirm that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy, by which sins are forgiven for Christ's sake, or that it is that confidence only by which we are justified; let him be accursed."

"Whoever shall affirm that justification received is not preserved, and even increased, in the sight of God by good works; but that works are only the fruits and evidences of justification received, and not the causes of its increase; let him be accursed."

"Whoever shall affirm that the good works of a justified man are in such sense the gifts of God, that they are not also his worthy merits; or that he, being justified by his good works, which are wrought by him through the grace of God and the merits of Jesus Christ, of whom he is a living member, does not really deserve increase of grace, eternal life, the enjoyment of that eternal life if he dies in a state of grace, and even an increase of glory; let him be accursed."

Surely nothing can be more explicit than the language of these canons, so-called, by which, amid a flood of seeming zeal for the honour and glory of Christ, the utmost care is taken utterly to exclude leis righteousness, and to deprive the sinner of all benefit from his work. Such are the lessons which, through all the earth, to the present hour, the Papal priesthood are communicating to their disciples. Is any other proof required that they teach another gospel than that which was taught by the Apostles? According to that, the sole and only foundation of the sinner's hope was the work of Jesus Christ.

As Protestants interpret the Sacred Scriptures, it is shown that men are justified not by infusing something called "righteousness," but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous in the sight of God, not for anything right or good in them, or done by them, but solely for the sake of Christ; not by imputing faith itself-the act of believing-as an act of the creature, or any other evangelical obedience due to them, as their righteousness, but by imputing to them, the obedience and satisfaction of Christ, the receiving the testimony of God concerning his Son, and trusting on Him and his work by faith, a faith which is not of themselves, but his gift.

That book tells us that "we are justified by faith, without the deeds of the, law;" that being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ," and that "He is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth."

From the whole strain of the Word of God, it is most clear that justification is purely an act of God's free grace, by which sin is pardoned, the sinner accepted, and the righteousness of Christ imputed to him by faith alone; and that in this way, and none other, he acquires a right to eternal life. This faith, by which he is justified, is the source of all good works, forasmuch as it infallibly and uniformly produces love, and hence that course of action which the Apostle designates works of faith and labours of love.

Those works and labours are the tests of faith; if there be no labour, there is no love. The evidence of justification is sanctification; the proof that there is a title for heaven is that there is a growing meetness for it. There is no proof of a change of state in the absence of a change of character. Sanctification is the fruit and the evidence of justification.

Popery, on the contrary as we have. seen, makes sanctification a part of justification, thus excluding grace to mace way for works, and confounding the cause with the effect. It talks of the infusing of grace by baptism, as constituting the first justification, and of a subsequent increase of grace, as merited by good works, as forming a second justification positions, both at utter variance with the Word of God.

Reader, the subject in both lights is now before you, and the Book of God is in your hand; what say you? According to that Book, on whose side does the truth of God seem to lie? Suffer us to ask, have you given the subject the consideration which is due to it? Have you deliberately made up your mind as to the consistency of either view with the Word of God? Have you treated it as its importance demands? If it be the primary element of the great controversy between Protestants and r Papists, is it not because it is the primary concern of a lost world?

Have you made up your mind in favour of Protestantism as a system of doctrine? If so, then have you allowed it to take the personal turn which belongs to it? Have you, in good earnest, put the question already cited from the Prophet Micah, "Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and bow myself before the High God?" "What shall I give for my transgression, and what for the sin of my soul?"

Have you arrived at any answer? and is it in harmony with what we have been setting forth as the Protestant doctrine, solely and exclusively the blood and righteousness of Jesus Christ, received by faith in the divine testimony concerning Him?

Has your conscience felt the burden of its guilt? By this faith has that burden been removed? Does it now enjoy peace?

Are you reconciled to God? Is the love of God shed abroad in your heart? Do you claim, call, and walk with God as your father? Do you love the rest of the heavenly family?

Will you abide the application of the test set forth by John, "We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren?" Do you love the Lord Jesus Christ? Will you bear the further application of his own test on this point "He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me?"

In a word, has the Gospel made you happy? Are you now living a life of faith upon the Son of God, as having loved you, and given himself for you? This is true religion. Happy he who can say, "This is mine!"

A moment's reflection will show you the need of this question being put by us, and answered by yourselves. The danger is very great, lest you should possess the Evangelical Protestant creed, to the exclusion of the Evangelical Protestant character. But it is to be remembered that the Sacred Scriptures are not less explicit concerning the character than concerning the creed: "Old things are passed away, and all things are become new."

Allowing that such language is figurative, can anything warrant such a figure but a mighty, an all-pervading, and a permanent change? This is the great salvation-the foundation of all real lasting felicity. We say felicity, for heaven is not merely a thing of place, but of character.

There can be no happiness without holiness; and holiness just means restoration to the knowledge, fervour, love, and service of God. Regeneration is that work of the Spirit upon the soul, whereby men become partakers of the Divine nature, and through that of the Divine character, and by that of the Divine blessing; hence, said Peter, addressing his countrymen, "God having raised his Son from the dead, bath sent Him to bless you by turning every one of yon from his iniquities."

Protestantism is beset with perils. Men satisfied in their judgment that they have the truth of God, may hold it in unrighteousness, making religion-that which constitutes the life-mainly to consist of a body of opinions. 'thus to act will certainly be to perish! Protestantism is not merely an opinion, it is a power, whereby the human soul is renovated and the character reformed. Doctrines have no value but as the instruments of the power of God, which thereby works to salvation. Here it is that Protestant communities are weak; their people are not worthy of their principles. They do not adequately represent their principles, they belie them!

Multitudes of Catholics, on the other hand, have been better than their creed, just as multitudes of Protestants have been worse. Many Catholics, in spite of the priest and the pool of lies into which they are plunged, have yet discovered and cleaved to the main truths of the Gospel, without having sufficient light to bring them out of their prison house, whereby their hearts have been purified and their souls saved.

The heartfelt scorn of Popery, and zealous efforts to obstruct its deadly march, must not be confounded with the life of truth and the life of piety with repentance towards God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. We therefore conjure every reader who is enthralled by Popery to burst his fetters, and come forth into the glorious intellectual liberty that the Scripture brings; we at the same time implore him not to be satisfied with anything short of the liberty wherewith Christ Jesus makes his people free.

Once justified freely by the grace that is in Christ Jesus, filled with the peace that passeth understanding, richly replenished with the word of truth, and a supply of the spirit of grace, then let him come to the help of the Lord against the mighty, and let him join in the war-cry of the righteous, "No peace with Rome!"
Clerical Celibacy
Fornication, concubinage, adultery, if decently gone about, were safe; but it became all to beware of marriage!
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

THERE is a peculiarity about the subject of Celibacy. The chief complaint against the other dogmas of Catholicism is, that they have no support in the Sacred Scriptures, properly interpreted. Several of them, indeed, have not even the shadow of it; while the rest are founded on the most obvious and culpable perversions. In the case of Celibacy, however, it is altogether otherwise.

Not only is there no Scripture which admits of being so perverted on its behalf, but there is most explicit and emphatic Scripture against it. It is expressly foretold, that among the other evil deeds of the Man of Sin, would be the prohibition of marriage. There is no point on which the Church of Rome is in such a fix. Her sin is here written on her forehead, as if by an angel's hand, in letters of fire!

The Council of Trent, in its Twenty-fourth Session, 1563, dealt largely with the question of marriage, pouring its fiercest anathema upon the heads of all who should dare to deny that marriage was one of the Seven Sacraments of the Church, and that, as such, it conferred grace! Those who maintained that persons in holy orders might "contract marriage, and that the contract is valid," were the subjects of the heaviest maledictions.

Such, from that hour, has been the law of the Romish Church respecting the marriage of the clergy. All ecclesiastics, of whatever order or degree, are bound to celibacy, and the penalty of marriage is instant excommunication. They might form unhallowed connections, and live in the grossest iniquity, from the Pope downward to the humblest mendicant-that was connived at. Something, to be sure, might at times be done for the sake of appearances; but the grossest licentiousness was winked at, even when it could not be concealed. But the penalties were trifling- apparent rather than real.

Fornication, concubinage, adultery, if decently gone about, were safe; but it became all to beware of marriage! Nature and reason had long rebelled against the monstrous interdict; and it was not till after a considerable time, and much conflict, that the point was ultimately carried.

At last the enemies of truth and virtue triumphed, and thus was established one of the most immoral and pernicious institutions of the Popedom. It deserves remark, that the laity in general-strangely, and to their own grievous hurt-sided with the Vatican, and took part against the married priests, whom they persecuted in all possible ways, covering them with odium, and even reducing them to the sad alternative of starvation, or separation from their families!

While the married ministers, in many places, were thus driven out, and no others came forth to take their places, religious services, extensively throughout Germany, were unperformed. This was only a portion, and the lightest, of the penalties the people were to pay for their folly and wickedness; and in due season, they were visited with the terrible remainder, which they suffered in the shape of a deep wound on the morals of society, and on the peace, order, and purity of their own families.

It is a pleasing fact, and one which is peculiarly gratifying to Englishmen, that in no other country did the new doctrine of the celibate find so little favour with either the people or the prince as in England. The bulk of the British clergy were married, and Henry I., nobly standing between them and the fury of Rome, permitted them to continue with their families.

The celibacy of the clergy is a matter of fact, which, with its effects, has come within the province of the civil, who has dealt with it as freely as the ecclesiastical, historian; and both have united in testifying that, while Popery was rampant, it was the curse of the world. The circumstances of the case are such as to demand notice. The conjunction was of a character to show that it was a deep-laid scheme of the Prince of Darkness for the destruction of the Christian religion. Let it be remembered that the mass of the clergy, the subjects of a forced celibate, were men idle and luxurious, wholly destitute of true religion, and unrestrained by the fear of God. Human nature in the hearts of such men took terrible vengeance on the abettors of the injustice done them.

The very restraints put upon them only tended the more fearfully to develop the full force of their depravity. A mere digest of the history of their misdeeds would require whole volumes; but we cannot stain our pages with any attempt even at an analysis. Celibacy was enjoined upon the clergy under the pretext that it would eminently contribute to holiness; but while this was the avowed, it was very far from being the true, cause.

It was a lie spoken in hypocrisy; it is, therefore, proper to say, that if superior holiness was not found, it was not sought. The object aimed at was of a wholly different nature; it was not to produce an eminently spiritual priesthood, but to fortify the Papal throne, and augment, throughout all the earth, the Papal power.

As if to increase the danger, these were the men that were to keep the conscience of the female, as well as the male portion of the human race, and for that end to preside in the Confessional. These men were in the highest possible degree prepared for being themselves tempted; and, then, they were placed in circumstances of the strongest possible temptation. That the bulk of them should not have fallen, was all but impossible; that any stood, is a matter for wonder. Infernal ingenuity was never so exercised in devising means to destroy the morality of mankind. It may be doubted whether this may not be considered as the master-stroke of the Prince of Darkness.

Before the rise of the Lutheran Reformation, the world was strewed, through the priesthood, with the wrecks of virtue; and no wonder if, up to the present hour, in the darkest places of the earth, the abomination remains with little abatement. The state of things was such that the bulk of modern readers have no conception of it; and it will not be without difficulty, they will bring themselves to credit the most veritable history. It may, therefore, be proper, in support of the heavy charges we have made in the foregoing paragraphs, to cite from the best authorities, chiefly Popish, a few facts confirmatory of our representations.

The writings of Elizabeth of Germany, abound with charges. She says, addressing the Bishops: " The iniquity of the land, which ye have hidden for the sake of silver and gold, ascends up like the smoke of a furnace." Maimburg, a celebrated Popish writer, says, "The lives of the clergy themselves are so horribly debauched, that I cannot, without trembling, relate the hideous description."

The sphere of their abominations was extended to the monasteries and nunneries-those pretended paradises of pristine purity. Cardinal Baronius, himself the last man to bring a false charge, confesses that "They were deformed with the foulest practices, and that there was no crime of which their inmates were not guilty."

Mapes, the Archdeacon of Oxford, an indisputable witness, who was intimately conversant with the state of the Continent, has recorded the results of his experience thus: -There is no demon worse than a monk! All the abbots I have ever seen, by their manner and conduct, lead men to hell." The renowned William of Paris, a monkish historian of the first distinction, moreover a lover of truth and virtue, has borne similar testimony. "The clergy, according to him, "have neither piety nor learning, but rather the foul vices of devils, and the most monstrous uncleanness and crimes! Their sins are not mere sins, but rather the most prodigious and dreadful crimes! They are not the Church, but rather Babylon, Egypt, and Sodom! The prelates, instead of building the Church, destroy it and make a mock of God!" Passing on to a later time, Alvarus Palagius, a Papist, in his "Lament of the Church," makes a similar charge against the clergy. According to him, "They are addicted to feasting, drunkenness, and whoredom, which is a common vice with them; and most of them also, are guilty of the sin which is against nature. They are not examples of good to the laity, as they ought to be, but rather the contrary; for in the present day, commonly the clergy are more wicked than the laity."

As bearing upon the subject of this chapter, he says, "Against that holy chastity which they have vowed to God, they offend constantly, even in public; besides those most horrid crimes, which they practice in secret, and which neither my paper will receive nor my pen will write." Let us hear another devout and faithful witness, Catherine of Sienna, who thus testifies: - "In former times, the clergy were moral and faithful, but in the present day they are wicked. Wherever you turn you behold all the clergy, both secular and religious, prelates, and those subject to them, small and great, old and young, infected with crime, pursuing riches and delights, neglecting the support of the poor and the care of souls, simonaically selling the grace of the Holy Spirit, and mismanaging the affairs of the Holy Church. That which Christ purchased with his sufferings on the cross, they waste on harlots; they corrupt souls redeemed with the blood of Christ."

This bold and fearless writer, aroused by her zeal, thus apostrophized the clergy in the person of Christ, "Oh! diabolical tabernacle! I chose you to be the angels of the earth, but ye are incarnate devils, whose works ye do. Oh! wretched animal of uncleanness; thou showest thy flesh, anointed with sacred oil and consecrated to me, unto harlots; yea, thou doest still fouler iniquity."

But let us hear Giesler, author of the "Text Book of History." That most competent witness, speaking of the clergy, says: "Their chief offence, their incontinence, seemed to grow worse, the more there was done to restrain it. In no century had there been so many decrees passed against the concubinage of the clergy, as in the fifteenth, yet in none were complaints so common of their incontinence (which in Italy degenerated into unnatural vices), as well as derision and lamentation over the inefficiency of all the means used to restrain them. The number of the offenders made it difficult or impossible to carry into effect the more severe punishments, whilst the avarice of the Bishops substituted a pecuniary mulct, afterwards changed into an annual tax. The commonness of the offence made it seem to the clergy a light thing; of course the laity could not be expected to view it in any other light, and in consequence the vice increased to a fearful degree."

But enough! The recital of similar facts would be needless and endless, and we think more is unnecessary. This may surely suffice to show the people of England what may be the effect should Popery once more gain ascendency in the British Isles. The one great object of Pope Gregory VII was to separate the clergy as much as possible from all other interests, that they might be completely reduced to depend on the Pontiff.

The policy of the measure was precisely that which regulates earthly governments, in regard to fleets and armies, a desire to build around them a wall of separation from the people, and to divest them of all social interests, rendering them of no country, and without descent, cutting off at a stroke their name among mankind, and extinguishing all their interests in the affairs which domestic relations imply, and so creating an order of spiritual soldiers, to whom all men and all countries are alike, and constituting each an impersonation of heartlessness and selfishness, growing up into misanthropists, their bosoms the grave of every charity that sweetens life and blesses society. In trying to unmake men he succeeded in making devils.

Viewing the matter simply as a means to an end, the cunning of the project was equal to its wickedness. The success was complete. It greatly added to the power of the colossal engine of mischief of which it was so important a part. It was a meet step in the march of moral conquest-an additional trophy to the genius of iniquity. A body of agents were thus prepared for the doing of deeds which could not have been performed by men whose bosoms warmed with the sympathies of humanity while their hearts glowed with the charities of life.

Reader! such is the Roman celibate-that celibate which is still visible and active in your midst. Of the present character of that celibate, we shall say nothing; in England it is surrounded by antagonistic forces, in such strength as to control it in its more public manifestations. It is not to be judged by present appearance. Suffice it to say, that the principle is unchangeable, and that placed in its ancient circumstances, it would be attended with exactly its ancient effects.

It is essentially evil, and while it is in existence, it will continue to be a curse both to the individual and to society. It is assuredly not a plant of the Lord's right hand planting, and a thorough Scriptural reformation of the Christian Church will root it up throughout all the earth.
Indulgences
"Let no man deceive you with vain words."
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

The subject of Indulgences is one which occupies a conspicuous place in European history, from the relation in which it stands to the Reformation. That the doctrine may be rightly understood, it must be examined through the medium of Luther's life and labours. In this way, and in no other, can the real truth be got at.

Tetzel bent the bow of priestly imposture too far, and thus unwittingly brought upon his church all the calamities of the Lutheran revolt. This great fact has led to a vast amount of shuffling, equivocation, misrepresentation, and downright falsehood from the Papal writers who have treated of it. It is a thing-and almost the only thing of which it would seem the priesthood are rather ashamed.

As it was carried on in the days of Tetzel, human nature could hardly bear it, and hence the revolt to which the excesses gave birth, and there has since been a. disposition to moderate and restrain the doctrine, and wherever the violation of truth has been wanted to serve the purpose, as usual, the father of lies has been present to give his aid.

The first and just plan, however, and that against which it is in vain for the priests to object, is at once to repair to the literature of Luther's day, which will most incontrovertibly demonstrate that the Protestant view was the true one -viz., that it is a virtual licence to commit sin.

Next to this, we may have recourse to the Council of Trent, and to various authorized catechisms of the Papacy. By this, the matter must be tested, and from this there is no appeal. We set very light by the representations of Bossuet, Gother, and others, and the whole of the Irish priesthood at the present hour.

The great French Jesuit, as he was wont when pressed by truth, deliberately falsified; and it is a fact worthy of notice that the Irish bishops, in 185, in their examination before Parliament, in connection with their demand for what is called Emancipation, acted a part but too much resembling that of Bossuet. Kelly, Doyle, and Murray, all varied from each other. Even the last, by far the most candid, was highly culpable in his representations.

This is one of the few things in which the Council of Trent showed a spice of moderation: they appear to have been deeply impressed with the memory of the disgrace which attended the sale of Indulgences by Tetzel, and hence, while still assuming that "Christ had given to the Church the power of granting Indulgences, and that the use of them was very beneficial to the Christian people," they took care, as usual, to pour a curse on the head of all that deny it; they were careful, however, to abstain from defining what Indulgences really mean, simply designating them the "heavenly treasures of the Church."

In the Papal standards, the doctrine of Indulgences is defined as that which secures not only the remission of canonical penance imposed by the Church, but a remission of the temporal punishment, with which the sins of men are visited after their guilt and liability to eternal punishment has been removed by the Sacrament of Penance; and this temporary punishment maybe endured either in this life or in purgatory, so that a man may take his choice: if he will do penance here, he may leave the world with his guilt discharged; but if not he must suffer the punishment in purgatory! They are shut up to one or the other-penance here, or penal fires there!

The principle, on which Indulgences proceed, is very simple, more simple, generally, than is compatible with so much falsehood. It is assumed that fasts, alms, penance, pilgrimages, the hair shirt and the hard living, to which we have elsewhere referred, possess a power to satisfy.

Should they, however, in any case fail, they are then to go for supplemental merit to the great storehouse of merit laid up in the Church, the management of which is committed to the Pope. It lies with him, therefore, to grant remission of temporal punishment on such terms as he may think proper to impose. This is called an Indulgence. It may be limited to a fixed period, or it may extend through the whole life.

Neither is the benefit confined to men on earth, but maybe extended to souls in Purgatory; so that a powerful hold is gained on the benevolent and affectionate feelings of survivors, who are blind enough to believe the monstrous imposture.

The conditions on which the Indulgence is granted, are very varied; sometimes one penance is prescribed, and sometimes another, but the thing is never so thoroughly Popish, and to the priestly taste, as when it is-money! Pope Leo, who understood the matter thoroughly, condescended to enlighten the world on the mystery of this merciful provision. He tells them that it was permitted to him, by his apostolic authority, to grant Indulgences out of the superabundant merit of Christ, to the saints and to the faithful who are united to Christ as well for the living as for the dead.

It was a master-stroke to extend the bounty to boil worlds, since it greatly enlarged the sphere of blessing. The same Pope Leo says, "Wherefore all persons, whether living or dead, who really obtain any Indulgences of this kind are delivered from so much temporal punishment, due, according to Divine justice, for their actual sins, as is equivalent to the value of the Indulgence bestowed and received."

The intelligent author of "Rome in the Nineteenth Century," described things as they came before his eyes in a residence in the Eternal City. He says, "Plenary Indulgences and remission of sins are offered here on very easy terms. I was first rather startled with the prodigal manner in which that full pardon of all transgressions which the gospel promises only as the reward of sincere repentance and amendment-language which shows our author knew but little of the gospel-was bestowed at Rome in consideration of repeating certain prayers before the shrine of certain saints, or paying a certain sum of money to certain priests, you may buy as many masses as will free your souls from purgatory for twenty-nine thousand years at the Church of Saint Lateran, on the festal of that saint, and at another on the Quirinal Hill for ten thousand, and for three thousand years, and at a very reasonable rate. But it is in vain to particularize; for the greater part of the churches of Rome and the neighbourhood are spiritual shops for the sale of the same commodity."

This iniquitous system is not confined to the Continent and foreign countries: to say nothing of Ireland, it abounds in England. It is but a few years back since one was unblushingly proclaimed in the address to the British people. In 1845, the last Jubilee was called "the year of expiation and pardon, of redemption and grace, of redemption and indulgence."

Papal cupidity conjured the people to turn it to account. The Vicar-apostolic of the London District exhorted his charge to make the most of it. "Only sin," said he, "can exclude you from that kingdom; only the debt of temporal punishments incurred by sin can retard your entrance into glory . . . . . Avail yourselves of every means of displaying the debt to Divine justice. Spare no pains to prepare yourselves for the remission of your sins, and for the benefits of this plenary indulgence-the happy effects will be felt by you in that peace of soul and spiritual joy which the world could never give, and in a well-grounded hope of eternal happiness."

These are sentiments concerning which there can be no mistake. They form a distinction which has no foundation in the Word of God between punishment temporal and eternal-representing the eternal to be remitted, while the temporal are retained; professing to look sometimes to Christ for the remission of the eternal; and to the sinner's own works or sufferings, for the remission of the temporal; ever and anon confounding the temporal with the eternal, and thus, teaching him to view himself as his own sole and only saviour.

There is no point in which the Papal system is more vulnerable, and none through which it has received more deadly stabs from the sword of the Spirit. In spite of all that has been said, the thing, in plain expression, amounts simply to a licence of iniquity, and permission with impunity to perpetrate crimes!

It is to no purpose to say that the Indulgence is only-granted after the sin has been committed, and that it has, not, a prospective, but a retrospective bearing. What child sees not that this leaves the matter precisely as we have put it? A man is going to commit a sin, and beforehand he knows the price it will cost him. The price lie stands prepared to pay. He perpetrates the enormity, and pays accordingly, and there is an end of the matter!

But this is not all. Indulgences have been sold in abundance for sins to be committed! Nay, reader, start not. Tetzel himself, the Caliban of the Papacy in matters of Indulgence, did so. Hear him as, addressing the multitude, he exclaims:

"Come, and I will give you letters furnished with the seal by which the sins, even those you may have a mind to commit hereafter, shall be all forgiven you. I would not exchange my privileges for those of St. Peter in heaven; for I have saved more souls by my indulgences, than the Apostle by his discourses. Indulgences not only save the living, but they save the dead too. Priest, noble, merchant, woman, young girl, young man, hearken to your parents and your friends who are dead, and who cry to you from the bottom of the abyss, ` We are enduring tortures! A small alms would deliver us; you can give it, and you will not!' The very instant the piece of money chinks at the bottom of the strong box, the soul is delivered out of purgatory, and flies up to heaven."

We might very copiously illustrate this point, but we abstain. Since it to say, that the result has been both from its prospective and its retrospective bearings, to embolden sinners in their career of transgression; and hence, it is testified by all competent witnesses who have sojourned in Popish countries, that the system of Indulgences most fearfully contributes to laxity of morals.

Mr. Eustace in his "Classical Tour," thus explains the state of things in Italy when he was there, and ascribed it to the sale of Indulgences. Mr. Graham, too, tells us of an individual pointed out to him, who had stabbed his brother so that he had expired immediately after the deed.

What was the result? Was the murderer apprehended and dealt with according to his wickedness? Not so! Ho repaired to Rome, purchased his freedom from the Church, and received a written protection from a Cardinal, in consequence of which he was walking about without concern-a second Cain!

Reader, we have done. "Let no man deceive you with vain words." Take not the account of the matter, as you will find it in Romish books, since nothing can be more contrary to facts than the representations of the Jesuits. We appeal to history, the history of the Church of Rome, and refer you to the recent work. of D'Aubigne on the Reformation, which will supply you with facts illustrative of the basis we have laid down, and demonstrative of our entire argument.

Indulgence, although one of the weaker points of the Romish system, is, nevertheless, a part in admirable harmony with the whole. It is essentially anti-Christian; no part of the mighty scheme of error and falsehood is more skilfully levelled against the grace of God and the work of Christ. None better deserves to be stamped with the image and superscription of Antichrist. It is one of the master strokes of the Prince of Darkness!
Image Worship
"To those who diligently teach not the whole Christ-loving people to adore and salute the venerable, and holy, and precious images of all the saints; let them be anathema."
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

MAN must have religion of some sort; should he cease to worship the God who made him, he will worship the god whom he himself made-an idol graven or molten-or it may be a stock, a stone, a creeping thing, the sun, the moon, the stars, or even the devil!

Men, by degrees, lost the knowledge of God a result which was the punishment of their previous misconduct, since, "when they knew God they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful;" and "because they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, He gave them up to a reprobate mind."

This state of things gives a fearful significance to the second commandment, and shows how wisely, and with what decision Moses met the reigning evil of his times through the earth when he thus enacted, "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them, for I, the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation."

This law not only cut down the tree of idolatry, but also extirpated its root among the Jews. This is a point on which there can be no dispute; the only question then, is, was there any loophole left for its introduction to the Christian dispensation? This question, too, we presume, can only be answered in one way.

The point, therefore, to be determined, is, has idolatry found its way into any portion of the Christian Church, so called? and if so, is it the Church of Rome? The reply of the Protestants, is "Yes, she is guilty!" Such, and so grave is the charge we have to bring against the Popedom.

The priest will of course deny it; and even affect to resent the charge as a calumny, and a slander. No matter. Protestants are quite familiar with this mode of proceeding. It is very convenient for the advocates of a bad cause; they will try to make the use of images among them, a very harmless and even an edifying thing; they will tell you they use images only as one does a portrait, or a bust of a deceased friend-to excite the memory of by-gone days, and to rekindle reverential affection, and that images of the Godhead are highly serviceable in helping the worshipper to stay his mind, and to keep alive the affections.

This is all that can be said for the practice, but might not every word of this have been said by the Jews in the days of Moses? Did not men then require such aids at least, as much as now? But was it not found then, that the sure tendency was to stop short at the image, instead of looking through and beyond it, to the object it was used to represent? Was not this the case universally, and did not Idolatry fill the land and bring captivity and destruction upon the Jews? In this way, was not the Most High shut out from his own universe through all the world, and actually forgotten by his own creatures? Again, is not God a spirit, immortal and invisible, "dwelling in light that no man can approach unto, that no man hath seen, or can see?" How, then, is it possible to make an image, carved or molten, that shall represent the Godhead?

But there is something serious in the history of this image worship, and which must not be overlooked. How came it that the Papists have taken such liberties with the second commandment, if it does not in some way militate against their system? It is an adage that wicked men never oppose the Bible till they find that the Bible opposes them.

We are not without a suspicion that such is the case in the present instance. Else how comes it that in many editions of the Sacred Scriptures, which, from various causes, the Church of Rome has been induced to issue, she has actually expunged the second commandment altogether? And how is it that, as if to conceal the fraud, by still keeping up the number to ten, she has divided the last commandment into two? Does such conduct as this comport with honesty? Is there not something very suspicious about it?

Such conduct is all the more suspicious when it is remembered that so strongly did the Primitive Church feel upon this subject, that many of their most distinguished ministers entertain serious scruples as to the moral character of the arts of painting and sculpture. During the first 300 years the Christian Church stood at the furthest remove from all approach to the use of images for any purpose whatever. There is no subject, -the true history of which is better known, and the unanimous testimony is to this effect.

Images were first introduced as mere ornaments, by some Christians in Spain, early in the fourth century, and were promptly condemned by the Council of Eliberis, as fraught with danger; and the event has showed that the objectors were men of penetration. Images were preceded by the introduction of pictures of saints and martyrs into the churches, so called, which prepared the way for them a fact, which shows the tendency of the human mind, and the necessity of making a stand at the outset.

The evil increased apace; but only still in the way of ornament, and that in the midst of opposition from many of the wise and good. By the sixth century, however, they became universal throughout Christendom; step by step they were allowed to be used as an aid to devotion by the weak and the superstitious; till at length they began to be worshipped.

By this time, too, the zeal of the Councils began to relax; and, as aids, images were allowed by them, but as objects, denounced. Gregory the Great vehemently condemned them in the latter capacity; and with such effect as to give a powerful check to this incipient idolatry; and for a time, the worship ceased. The Councils gave image worship no encouragement; but in the eighth century it found zealous patrons in the lazy monks and the stupid populace. Thus much for its history; we must now bring the charge home to the Church of Rome at the present hour.

As this is far from a light matter, it must be gravely dealt with, we shall, therefore, at once appeal to the standard of Popish doctrine the Council of Trent. By that Assembly it was determined, "That the images of Christ, of the Virgin Mother of God, and of the saints, are to be had and retained, especially in churches, and due honour and veneration to be paid to them; because the honour which is exhibited to them, is referred to the prototypes which they represent; so that through the images which we kiss, and before which we cover our heads and lie prostrate, we adore Christ; and pay veneration to the saints whose likenesses the images bear; as is ordained by the Decrees of Councils, particular the second Nicene."

This Nicene Council speaks with still more decision on the subject of the images and saints in the following words: "To those who diligently teach not the whole Christ-loving people to adore and salute the venerable, and holy, and precious images of all the saints; let them be anathema."

Image worship is not less certain throughout the Papal world than Virgin worship; the image of St. Dominic may, perhaps, in the intermediate roll, be entitled to precedence. This famous block has often rejoiced in 100,000 pilgrims paying devotions and making offerings at his shrine during a single anniversary! We might traverse the entire kingdom of Antichrist, and adduce from every part of it proof of a desperate addition to image worship; but it is useless. It is better to assume the fact, and reason upon the folly as is admirably done in the Homily on Idolatry by the Church of England. The following are extracts:

"What meaneth it that Christian men, after the use of the Gentiles' idolaters, cap and kneel before images? which, if they had any sense and gratitude would kneel before men carpenters, masons, plasterers, founders, and goldsmiths, their makers and framers; by whose means they have attained this honour, which else would have been ill. favoured, and rude lumps of clay or plaster, pieces of timber, stone, or metal, without shape or fashion, and so without all estimation and honour; as that idol in the Pagan poet confesseth, saying, `I was once a vile block, but now I am become a god,' etc. What a fond thing is it for a man, who hath life and reason, to bow himself to a dead and insensible image, the work of his own hands! Is not this, stooping and kneeling before them, adoration of them, which is forbidden so earnestly by God's Word? Let such as so fall down before images and saints, know and confess that they exhibit that honour to dead stocks and stones, which the saints themselves, Peter, Paul, and Barnabas, would not to be given them, being alive; which the angel of God forbiddeth to be given to him. What meaneth it that they, after the example of the Gentiles' idolaters, burn incense, offer up gold to images, hang up crutches, chains, and ships, legs, arms, and whole men and women of war, before images, as though by them, or saints as they say, they were delivered from lameness, sickness, captivity, or shipwreck? Is not this colere imagines, to worship images so earnestly forbidden in God's Word?"

Reader! We have done! The facts are before you. Have you duly weighed them? If so, to what conclusion have you come? Is not this matter a most important addition to the fearful indictment, which the Prophets and Apostles of God have to deliver against the Church of Rome? Does not the mutilation of the second commandment alone suffice to determine the question of Papal guilt? Must there not be an intolerable consciousness that there is something in the system which cannot bear the application of that enactment? Is not the deed that of a forger, destroying the only document that can prove his guilt? How would the subject be viewed by a British judge, and a British jury? Would not the court denounce it as guilt of the deepest dye, and would not the jury, without a moment's hesitation, and with perfect unanimity. Bring in a verdict of guilty, without recommendation to mercy?
Extreme Unction
"If any man shall affirm that the rite and practice of Extreme Unction, as observed by the Holy Roman Church, is repugnant to the doctrine of the Apostle James, and that it may therefore be altered or despised without sin; let him be accursed."
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

EXTREME UNCTION is one of the sacraments of Rome, and as such, is held to "confer grace on the receiver;" it is therefore placed on the same level with the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, Baptism, and Confirmation. Such is its position in the standards of Papal doctrine.

The Council of Trent has pronounced its ever-ready anathema on every soul of man who shall deny that it is "truly and properly a sacrament instituted by Christ our Lord," so that every Papist is shut up to the faith of the dogma on peril of damnation! But as a sacrament, it is of course the channel of Divine communication, and hence anathema is the punishment of any man "who shall say the sacrament of Extreme Unction does not confer grace, nor forgive sin, nor relieve the sick."

Let the Protestant reader ponder this! Popery is as profuse in its curses, as it is parsimonious in its blessings; it never blesses but for money, while its curses are dispersed gratuitously! In this case, as usual, it builds upon a single portion of the Word of God, that of James v. 14, 15, which has thus been made instrumental of working a world of misery, and of extorting incalculable treasure from the human family.

Great was the ingenuity of the Mother of Harlots in so applying a very simple Scripture. By these means she was enabled to extend her cruel dominion to the other world, and thus really to rob the living for an imaginary benefit to the dead! The act is one as impious as it is remorseless, and serves very impressively to illustrate the true spirit of the Church of Rome, whose chief study is, to fleece her flock from the birth of each generation to their burial.

She seeks not them, but theirs; all her forces are made to concentrate upon the single point of extorting money, and this from age to age, she prosecutes without shame or pity. She everywhere seizes their substance with the most ravenous avidity. The love of lucre is with her, a ruling passion, an all-devouring flame, which nothing can satisfy. The more she has, the more she desires to have!

But let us now look carefully to the matter of Extreme Unction; the use of oil for the purposes of personal unction, was, and still is, common in the East, and like the kiss of charity, washing the saints' feet, and some other things, it was mixed up with the proceedings of the Primitive Christians.

The Apostles sanctioned the custom in the exercise of their, miraculous powers; in Mark vi. 13, we are told, that they "anointed with oil many that were sick and healed them." The act was significant; it arrested the attention of the infidel observer, and prepared him for what was to follow; it also tended to fix the faith of the believer on the deed which was being performed before his eyes. It was, moreover, an index of the presence, and an emblem of the power of the Holy Spirit. Thus, then, nothing could be more natural at that time than for James to enjoin the imitation of the Apostles on the churches of his day, who, among other gifts, possessed the gift of healing; but with these gifts, the application of the Unction passed away, and would have been numbered with the things which have been-things local and temporary, but for the skill, the craft, and the cupidity of Antichrist, whose genius for perversion, and imposture overlooks nothing that is adapted to mulct the foolish, and filch the property of all.

In the creation of this fictitious sacrament of robbery, a very serious difficulty stood in the way; but Popery is not exceedingly scrupulous; and by withholding the Word of God, and using with the necessary boldness her authority to suppress all troublesome inquiry, she has generally succeeded in maintaining her hold on a large portion of the human race up to the present hour.

This difficulty arose from the fact that the Apostolic Churches uniformly used the anointing for purposes of life, whereas "Mother Church" has uniformly used it for purposes of death! In every case, the Apostles contemplated restoration to health, and the prolongation of life; in every case the Pope and his Priests contemplate death, and the passage of the soul into the world of spirits, and affects to aid him in the prosecution of his journey thitherward!

There is reason to conclude that the Apostles never used it when all rational hope of recovery was gone, while the Popish priest never uses it, while a spark of rational hope of recovery remains! In all points, then, there is not merely difference, but direct opposition, and positive contradiction between the Apostle and the Pope!

Had a primitive Christian seen the administration of the Extreme Unction of Rome, it would have been to him a novelty and a mystery, leaving him at an utter loss what to make of it. The fact that this cruel fiction was ever received so extensively among mankind only serves to indicate the degree of darkness, which at length brooded over their spirits in relation to all things religious. Deeds of this description can only be done in the night; it is, therefore, no marvel that this so-called sacrament, was not generally admitted till the twelfth century, when the midnight of the Middle Age drew on.

The making of so daring an experiment upon the credulity of men required the deepest shade; and truly Antichrist, with his instruments and emissaries, made the most of the dreadful hour in which the power of darkness was permitted to reign

The manner of administering this fictitious ordinance displays its character; no oil is admissible but that of the olive, which must, moreover, be consecrated by episcopal hands. The application of the oil, is so gone about as to require the gravity which stupidity alone can impart, to prevent its being laughed to scorn. The thing carries quackery and imposture so obviously upon the face of it, that we cannot withhold from the celebrated catechism of the Council of Trent, a statement of the case:

"The Sacred Unction is to be applied, not to the entire body, but to the organs of sense only-to the eyes, the organs of sight; to the ears, of hearing; to the nostrils, of smelling; to the mouth, of taste and speech; to the hands, of touch." "Not to the entire body, but to those members which are properly the organs of sense, and also to the loins, which are, as it were, the seat of concupiscence, and to the feet, by which we move from one place to another."

If this is not the climax of impudence, the very apex of imposture, we know not where to find it. Nothing but the solemnities of the death-bed, combined with the profoundest ignorance, could suppress an outbreak of ridicule and indignation from every bystander, on beholding such an exhibition of absurdity.

The Council of Trent, as was their custom, having defined their fiction, hurled anathemas at all gainsayers, and proceeded to support their conclusions by their so-called canons, closing each with the customary imprecation.

"If any man shall affirm that the rite and practice of Extreme Unction, as observed by the Holy Roman Church, is repugnant to the doctrine of the Apostle James, and that it may therefore be altered or despised without sin; let him be accursed."

Such is the spirit of the Vatican. Such is the mode in which it fulminates its curses against the Protestant world! Now, certainly, were cursing in point, and could it serve any really practical purpose by promoting the truth, man's welfare and the Divine glory, Popery in this tenet, as well as in every other, would furnish the proper mark for the aggregate anathema of every sane soul among the human species.

Transubstantiation is sufficiently revolting, the Mass is a horrid spectacle, and Absolution, as it respects the dangers attending it, is a step in advance in the path of iniquitous cruelty to man; but the whole culminates into a point of atrocity in this matter of Extreme Unction.

It is a sight to make an angel weep, to see a creature who has been duped, deceived, and plundered through life, on having reached the end of his journey, and lying on the brink of eternity, attended by the priest, for the purpose of administering the said Extreme Unction!

Let the reader only think what on these occasions is done; first then, there must be confession, which is followed by absolution; then the Eucharist, what Protestants term the Lord's Supper, is to be administered; and the drama is to be closed with the "Sacred Chrism," applied to his eyes, ears, nose, lips, loins, hands, feet; and then, like the pilgrim of old, prepared to commence his journey to heaven, he is left to learn the dreadful delusion which has been practised upon him, by descending into the gulph of perdition! We shudder as we write!

Repentance towards God, and the reason of it; faith in the blood of Christ, and the justification which flows from it; the support and consolation, the light and power of the Spirit of God-these have no place in the dying chamber of the poor infatuated Papist! No! he has been the subject of the realm of Antichrist, a realm in which Christ was not made known to him while living, and, in perfect consistency with what has gone before, Christ has no place on his death-bed; he and Christ will only come together face to face, when he shall proceed to the judgment-seat, to give an account of the deeds done in the body!

We observe with what particularity some Papists dwell upon the fact that Luther, to get rid of the "Sacrament of Extreme Unction," rejected the Epistle of James. False men! As every scholar knows, it was not the matter of Unction, in the Epistle of James, that troubled Luther, not at all; but the language of James as expounded by the Papists, on the subject of Justification-a doctrine so dear to Luther's heart, because of its incalculable importance to the hopes of men and the glory of Christ, and the abhorrence in which it was held by the Romish Church.

That doctrine, apparently to the superficial reader, as stated by James, was opposed to the grace of the Gospel, and, therefore, abused by the Romanists; a fact from which, with characteristic decision, zeal, and impetuosity, Luther was led to question the inspiration of the Apostle James.

Luther was great and mighty, but he was not perfect; and one of the few spots on that glorious sun was this rash conclusion; rash because, as every one who understands the Scriptures now sees, nothing is more clear than that the doctrine of James is perfectly reconcilable with the doctrine of a gratuitous justification. Paul and James are in perfect harmony.

Reader! the case of the Bible and the Protestants is closed, and we ask you to deliver your verdict. Survey the subject from what point you please, and through the medium either of reason or of Scripture, or of both, and say whether it can be of God, or whether it is not a most wicked imposition practised upon an infatuated world?

Let it be considered in relation to the dying, and say if the administrators of such a system be not chargeable with the blood of souls. Viewed in connection with the spirit of the Lord, say if it is not full of blasphemy. As it bears upon the subject of the honour and glory of Christ, is it not fraught with the most flagrant impiety? Ought not the existence of such a tenet to prompt every man that loves the truth, to pray for the hour when the Lord shall "destroy it by the breath of his mouth, and the brightness of his coming"?
Catholic Unity
The unity of which Rome boasts is a fiction, a mere imagination.
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

WE hear much in these times of Catholic Unity, which has in it a good deal to captivate and charm minds of a certain order, as appears from the recent productions of the English Tractarians. There is nevertheless, perhaps, no subject on which there has been more language used with less truth.

The unity of which Rome boasts is a fiction, a mere imagination. It is true, there is an external appearance of unity; there is the Pope, the head and centre of what is termed Catholic Christendom, the appointer and ruler of the Popish Episcopate, the judge in appeals of all causes from all countries. There is, to a very large extent, in all that is essentially wrong, a corresponding unity: a unity in mummery and superstition; a unity of unintelligent devotion; a unity in the preposterous use of a dead language in the presence of a living people; a union in regard to these things, and many more—all evil—there is, but there is no union in that which essentially constitutes the union of the Church of Christ.

It has been demonstrated a hundred times, on a variety of matters, on which the utmost unity is pretended, there is nothing but discord amongst both Popish writers and speakers. Nor is this wonderful; the wonder, indeed, would be were it otherwise; truth is one and the same, but error is manifold and variable.

When a body of honest witnesses, all competent, come together before a court of law to bear their testimony to any given point, that testimony is always substantially one, and the little differences which may creep into their evidence are among the best, the most satisfactory and the most pleasing proofs of their integrity. Thus it was with the writers of the four Gospels; their slight discrepancies are the highest proofs that can be given of their integrity, showing there was no collusion among them that each was independent, and honestly delivered the thoughts which were within him without reference to what might be said by others.

Popery has affected to triumph over the diversity of sect and opinion amongst Protestants, but without just cause; forasmuch as, with seeming diversity, there is real agreement as to the one faith, the one Lord, and the one baptism. Nothing can be more erroneous than to consider the divers sects and denominations of Christians which obtain in Protestant Christendom as the subjects of so many religions.

This conclusion may suit malignity to draw, but it is at variance with truth. In England, for example, the Established Church, and the bulk of Dissenters which have sprung from it, all hold the same fundamental principles. There is a measure of unity between English Churchmen and Independents, Baptists, Methodists, Moravians, Presbyterians, and others, of which Papists seem to have no conception, or if they understand, they conceal their knowledge, and declare the thing not as it is actually but as they would have it to be. The Articles of the English Church not only represent substantially, and with great clearness and beauty, the common faith of the mighty mass of Evangelical Churches in England and Ireland, but on the Continent, and in America, and all over the world.

A celebrated Romish bishop published what he was pleased to call "Variations of Protestant Churches," a work which supplies, perhaps, a larger amount of misquotation, misstatement, perversion, and mutilation than any other work on any other subject, to be found in any living language. But that celebrated polemic seemed to forget that this was a game that two could play at, and the result was to bring forth Edgar's "Variations of Popery," a work which repays him in his own coin, but upon principles of truth, fairness, and honour, in a manner for which few of the Popish prelates were, perhaps, prepared. That work cuts up Popery root and branch, not only showing the incoherence of what is not true, and the impossibility of building it up into a consistent system, but the inconsistency of its facts with sound principles, and of the whole with the Word of God.

There has nowhere been produced a more damaging defence of Protestantism, and assault on Popery, since it literally demolishes the whole of the mighty Papal fabric.

On the subject of this unity we cannot enlarge, suffice it to say, that there is no boast so unfounded as that of the Romish Church to unity. Protestants, on the contrary, have their head, not on earth but in heaven, where they find a unity in the glorious person and offices of Him who was their Prophet, Priest, and King; a unity in the lessons which He left for their instruction, and which have been embodied by his servants in the Gospel; a unity in all the Apostolic writings; a unity in the effects everywhere produced by the knowledge of the truth as it is in Jesus, and the presence of the Spirit of God; a unity in peace, love, hope, joy, consecration, gratitude, and devotion.

On this subject we have some excellent thoughts in the celebrated work of Rev. Hobart Seymour, "Evenings with the Romanists." That very enlightened gentleman has borne an invaluable testimony to things he saw and heard at Rome. The following comprises a volume in itself: —

"Twenty-seven years have passed away since these conversations, of which the foregoing was a very small portion, were held. Since then I have seen no reason to change my opinions or to depart from my position. On the other hand, I have visited many lands, and have been a not inattentive observer of the working of the Church of Rome, both in the city of the Church, in Rome herself, and in almost every country in Europe."

"That opportunity for observation through many successive years has strengthened my views, and I feel more strongly than ever, that of all the churches of Christendom, the very last that ought to speak of diversities or divisions, is .the Church of Rome. It is her boast and pride that she admits and sanctions almost every diversity of doctrine, and of discipline, provided there be unity in submission to the Supreme Pontiff of Rome. I have myself witnessed in the church of the Propaganda Fide in Rome during the season of the Epiphany, no less than five different churches, as the Greek, the Armenian, the Nestorian, the Syriac, the Coptic, as well as the Roman, all celebrating the Lord's Supper, at different altars, and in different ways. The ceremonies were different. The manner of service was different. The forms of worship were different. The languages were different. In short, I have never seen or observed so great a dissimilitude between the Lord's Supper in the Lutheran-the Evangelical, the Episcopalian, the Presbyterian, the non-conforming churches of the Protestant communion, as I have seen and observed among those sections of Eastern, churches that are joined in the communion of the Roman Church. I have witnessed seven different forms-seven different liturgies-seven different languages-and seven different modes of celebrating the Lord's Supper, all in the church of St. Andrea della Valle in Rome. I have witnessed all the Greek rites in a Greek church-I have seen all the Armenian rites in an Armenian church in that city. Every diversity of doctrine, and liturgy and discipline, and language, is allowed and formally sanctioned, provided only all parties observe the one point of unity -submission to the supreme Pontiffs of Rome. So far is that carried, that in the Concordats or Articles of Agreement with Rome, there are special clauses reserving to whole countries the right to have their own liturgy and rites, and language, in preference to that of the Romish Church."

Touching the diversities of which the Romanists have made so much, Mr. Seymour refers to the following conversation with a Jesuit: —

"After some further conversation on his own experience as to such sources of difference, I asked-

"Is it not a fact that the differences between the various Protestant Churches are not on articles of faith, but principally upon mere points of discipline? That one church is governed by bishops and is called Episcopalian-that another is ruled by a Presbytery, and is thence styled Presbyterian-that a third is founded on the principles of the freedom of the particular church from the authority of any other, and is on that account called Independent; that one church prefers an authorized liturgy-that another chooses a liturgy of her own selection-that a third adopts a settled arrangement of extemporaneous prayer-that one has deacons to regulate its services -that another has churchwardens to attend to its affairs-that a third is carried on without either one or the other; that one church adopts a formal catechismal instruction-that a second prefers a Sunday school system-that a third has no system at all; that one church prefers administering baptism to infants-that another decides for baptizing adults that one adopts open-air preaching and class-meetings, and assemblies in barns and out-houses-that another prefers a more formal and regulated system of public service; that one church adopts a black dress for its officiating ministers-that another prefers a white surplice-that a third will have neither one nor the other: these surely are all matters of discipline-all mere trifles that have nothing to do with articles of faith. And yet these, and such things as these, are the only, or at least the principal points of separation between the various Protestants among us."

He said, laughing, that although it seemed very absurd, yet it was very true. These were not articles of faith; they were merely matters of discipline. "But are there not also," he asked, "some differences on articles of faith?"

"I said- No. And then added, that when we speak of Articles of Faith, we mean the Articles of our creeds. Now, our several sects, Church of England, Church of Scotland, Independents, Methodists, Baptists, and generally all the Protestant Churches, hold each and all the Articles contained in the Creeds. There may be shades of difference as to the explanation of words and things, but they are all agreed in the main. My full conviction is that there is as close and compact a union of doctrine in the Protestant Church as in the several churches constituting the body of the Roman Church; while in matters of discipline, it was no easy matter to determine in which the greatest variety was found to exist. The great and plain truth seems to be this-Romanists have their differences about what their Church says, but they agree to refer all to the decision of the Papal See. There is their point of unity. Protestants have their differences among themselves about what the Holy Scriptures say, but they are all agreed to refer all to the authority of the Holy Scriptures. There is their point of unity."

"He was very much struck with this statement; he seemed fully to take it in. It seemed to satisfy the feeling that was at work in his inner mind. He expressed himself very strongly."

Mr. Seymour further expands and enforces his views in the following address to the Jesuit. After some discussions which naturally led to it, he said: -

"Let it be always remembered, I said, I that union is not a necessary sign of spiritual life, as disunion is not a necessary evidence of spiritual death. If we enter a church or chapel, and observe the congregation, we are sure to find that however their hearts may be united, yet their minds, habits of thought, and reflection create certain diversities and shades of opinion. There may be union on all that is great and important, though there are diversities on matters of lesser moment. Their very diversities of judgment are a sign of mental activity and of real life. They are not dead. If then, we enter the churchyard, and sit beneath the shady cypress and the dark yew, and tread lightly the graves of the departed, there is found no disunion and no diversity there. There is no collision of mind or of feeling. All is peaceful, quiet, calm. This very unity is an evidence of the absence of all real life. They are truly dead, and all the life that is there, is that of the loathsome worm of the grave. And so in spiritual things. There is a union which is a sign of spiritual death, for it argues the absence of all intelligent activity and mental life. And there is a division, which is an evidence of spiritual life, for it proves the existence of mental thought and active intelligence. Among the mummies of Egypt, there are no religious differences, for all are dead. In the catacombs of Rome there is the most perfect union, for all are lifeless. Even among the children of the world, thoughtless, reckless as they are, there are no religious disputes, for all are spiritually dead. There are no varieties of opinion among a gallery of marble statues, for a perfect unbroken unity is evidence of death and not of life. The only true unity which is worth having, and which is quite consistent with diversity of sentiment, is the union of holy brotherhood-the union of the children of Christ the union of Christian heart with Christian heart, and the union of both in Jesus Christ, where, knowing that a perfect unity of opinion is no more possible than a perfect similarity of face, and knowing that there may be an agreement on great things, agreeing to bear and forbear, with differences on little things, the hearts of Christians may be united in brotherly love and sympathy, each with the other, and all seek and find the bond of union in Him, who is " the corner-stone in whom all the building, fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: in whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit." Eph. II. 20-22.

And this is the union of the Protestant Churches, or at least this ought to be their union. In the Church of Rome herself, we find an illustration, for she has within her bosom Jesuits, and Jansenists, and Dominicans, and Franciscans, and Augustinians, and Benedictines, and Carmelites, and innumerable other orders or sects, all differing in outward manner, all differing in their rules of life, all differing in their opinions on some particulars, especially having all different practices-superstitious practices, as I think-prevalent among them, and yet they have all this bond of union in the Pope.

Whatever be their differences, and sometimes they hate, and vilify, and intrigue against one another, acting with the most hateful jealousy and malignant rivalry; yet do they all find a bond of union in the Pope. It is thus, too, that the several Protestant Churches, with their diversities of forms and sentiments, too often also acting as enemies or rivals to each other, yet find their bond of union in Jesus Christ."

So much for the Popish figment of Unity of which she makes so much, and which has led astray so many people of education, position, and high pretensions in English society. All such conversions but serve to show how much ignorance may be found in ceiled houses. People ambitious to distinguish themselves by independence of thought, dart away from the beaten track of their benighted fathers and their vulgar contemporaries; they foolishly believe that different politics constitute different religions, and that mere circumstantial differences of creed constitute vital differences of faith, all which they affect to deem so many proofs of error in the matter of Protestantism.

As a cure for all this, they lift up their eyes to the City on the Seven Hills, and fix them on the " Man of Sin;" and, having found in him a unity, they prostrate themselves before the "Beast," and think they have attained to an incalculable blessing, when they have merely proved false to Scripture, to reason, and to common sense! We trust the foregoing testimonies of Mr. Seymour will not be thrown away upon them, and that our labour in this matter, now more than ordinarily important as it respects the British people, will not be without beneficial effects.
Communion In One Kind
"Whosoever shall affirm that all and everyone of Christ's faithful are bound by Divine command to receive the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist in both kind, as necessary to salvation, let him be accursed."
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

THERE is no error of the Church of Rome more easy of detection, or less defensible than that which withholds the cup from the people; language cannot make it more certain than that the Lord Jesus Christ gave both the bread and the wine to his disciples, and that they in their turn, did the same to the Churches formed under their immediate auspices. The Gospels in which the subject is mentioned, and the first Epistle to the Corinthians, have only to be looked at to render this clear beyond dispute; yet in the teeth of this fivefold demonstration, the Council of Trent issued the following dictum, fortifying, as usual, by anathema maranatha:

"Whosoever shall affirm that all and everyone of Christ's faithful are bound by Divine command to receive the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist in both kind, as necessary to salvation, let him be accursed."

This is one of a multitude of reasons for withholding the Scriptures from the people, since they would at once discover the imposture. The priesthood, as if aware that a fact so clear and simple cannot be concealed, have resorted to a fetch. They maintain that the Scriptures left it indifferent to receive it in one kind or both. The proper method of meeting this assertion is just to deny it, and to call upon the priests for proof.

To answer their own ends, they have mutilated the second commandment, and thence they mutilate the institution of the Lord's Supper—in consequence of which it now ceases to be the Lord's Supper at all, and becomes a something utterly unlike it, and unknown to the Apostles; but granting what we deny, that the wafer was a sufficient representation of the body of Christ, where is the representation of his blood that blood to which so much importance attaches in the Divine economy?

So far as the people are concerned, it is wholly without representation. It is stated, indeed, that in virtue of Transubstantiation, "Christ's whole and entire body and soul and divinity is received under one kind only"—that is, one memorial or the other, either the bread or the wine. Absurdity so revolting merits no reply other than indignant remonstrance or sharp rebuke, since it is an impious trifling of the highest subject about which the mind of man can be exercised.

It is no marvel if men who have dealt so freely with the Sacred Scriptures as a whole, and who withhold from the people, should take away half the ordinance of the Supper, and so modify that which remains as to render it no longer cognisable by those whose judgments of the thing have been found upon inspired records. No two things are less like each other than the Christian Supper and the Popish Mass; that the latter might be harmonized with the former, Christ should have stood in the upper room, and having performed a variety of mysterious acts, have stood up and told his disciples that Transubstantiation was completed. They should then have knelt around Him while He placed a particle of the bread, with his own hand, successively on their tongues, protruded for that purpose, wholly withholding the wine from them, and taking it Himself.

This mutilation of the original institution, more than most other deeds of Popery, bears the character of impious wantonness; it is a deed largely without a reason beyond the very obvious and serious one of carrying out the governing principle of opposition to Christ, and a determination in everything to set aside his arrangements, and to subvert his authority. This is conduct, which most richly merits, in all matters and in all respects, the designation assigned it in prophecy—"Antichrist." This is a point at which, at the outset, the Protestants yielded a very vigorous opposition, which had the effect of leading the Papal party, in the celebrated catechism of the Council of Trent, to attempt reasons which are of a character so contemptible that it would have been far more politic to have withheld them.

These reasons are in substance as follows:—"It is done lest the cup, being put into the hands of the people, any of the blood of the Lord should be spilt; lest the wine should become sour when kept for the sick. Many cannot bear the taste or the smell of wine, and find it injurious to health; in many countries it is difficult, if not impossible, to procure wine; lastly, withholding it serves to overthrow the heresy of those who deny that a whole Christ cannot be received in one kind."

It is difficult to deal gravely with such reasons for the act, since it is felt that to do so would be to offer an indignity to common sense. Still, argumentation on these childish and contemptible reasons has most needlessly cumbered the pages of controversy. The thing is beneath our notice. The proper way is at once to appeal to the Scriptures. It is a pure question of language in the hands of common sense.

It was felt, however, that the withdrawal of the cup was a great experiment upon mankind; but they had been already so blinded and so prostrated that there was very little danger in the attempt. It was, moreover, done by degrees, and it was not until the Council of Constance, in 1415, that the decree was proposed for the universal interdict of the cup to the people—an interdict against which reason and piety so revolted that obedience was by no means general for a considerable time. There was great opposition at the Council of Trent, and many noble spirits were found loudly and indignantly denouncing the violation of Scripture and of Divine appointments.

Bavaria was signalised in this way by its envoy, who, in uttering his protest, vehemently denounced the clergy, on the ground of their corruptions and profligacy. He boldly affirmed that there were not more than three or four who did not keep concubines, or who had not contracted clandestine marriages. The Bohemians occupied a position of equal honour; but opposition was to no purpose. The evil work went on till it was completed.

The Council of Trent might be viewed as the mightiest muster the Prince of Darkness ever made for the overthrow of Scripture truth and its representatives. Three Patriarchs, nineteen Archbishops, one hundred and forty-eight Bishops, three Abbots, six Generals of Orders, three Doctors of Rolls, and ninety-four Divines united to decree that the believing, teaching, and preaching of the priesthood should be according to the decree. That decree was to the effect that although Christ gave to the Apostles both bread and wine, yet it was not necessary to give both to the people, but that the Church—meaning themselves—had the power to alter, or modify, or institute any ordinance.

On this occasion it was further decreed that the Sacramental Communion of the Eucharist is not necessarily obligatory on children who have not attained the use of reason, for being regenerated in the laved of Baptism, and incorporated into Christ, they cannot lose the gracious state of children of God, which is acquired at that time. Raving completed the decree to this effect, as was their custom, they fortified the whole by a fourfold anathema against those who dispute it.

Thus was completed one of those acts of rebellion against the Head of the Church, and subversions of his Divine authority, which so signally characterizes the entire fabric of the Church of Rome—the great, the universal, the malignant opponent of the Church of Christ. By this, as in all other acts, under pretence of magnifying Him, she pours contempt on his wisdom, and overrules his enactments, thus fulfilling the predictions that had gone before concerning herself and her Head, that he should "oppose and exalt himself above all that is called God and that is worshipped, so that he, as God, should sit in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God," 2 Thess, ii. 4.

It adds, moreover, to the system of lying wonders; one fabrication reposes on another; the mighty structure is reared by adding impiety to impiety, lie to lie, one deception to another deception. This act clearly could not have been done but for Transubstantiation. It did not necessarily arise out of that, but was sustained by it. But for this the thing could not have been for a moment defended. Its deviation from the ancient practice, and from the Sacred Scriptures, was not to be denied even by the Popish priesthood, but the authority of the Church to "alter times and laws," and the withdrawal of the Word of God from the people, set all right, suppressed every jar, and stifled all discord.

Reader, the case is now complete. We will add no more. It lies with you, therefore, to form a judgment for yourself, and to declare it. Taking the Sacred Scriptures for your rule, you cannot err; and with confidence we leave the matter in your hands, willing to abide by your decision. It shall be yours to describe the character of the conduct with which the Church of Rome is chargeable in

Which has yet been set before you in these pages more impressively illustrates her impiety and her malignant opposition to everything that bears the name of Christ, and presents the impress of his authority.
Merit of Good Works
The error here is deep and deadly.
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

The question of Good Works is one of infinite moment. On this subject, Popery and the Gospel teach a very different doctrine: the Pope teaches that "our good works do merit eternal life, as worthy not only by reason of God's covenant and acceptation, but also by reason of the work itself." Such is the view of Bellarmine a Popish author of great distinction; and another of equal eminence, puts the point still more tersely. Vasquez has laid it down that "the good works of just persons are, of themselves, without any covenant or acceptation, acceptation, worlity of the reward of eternal life." The error here is deep and deadly.

Where are the just men to be found to do these works while in a state of condemnation just, and yet the subjects of perdition. Besides, it is here assumed that a man may by some means become just without having eternal life, and, consequently, while in a state of spiritual death; and that, on attaining to that just state, it becomes the ground of his claim to that eternal life. The idea is as confused as it is fatal; it is at utter variance with all correct views, both of the law and of the Gospel. The sane writer has very fairly, clearly, and at length stated the Popish doctrine as follows:

"Seeing the works of just men do merit eternal life, as an equal recompense and reward, there is no need that any other condign merit, such as that of Christ, should interpose, to the end that eternal life might be rendered to them. Wherefore we never pray to God that, by the merits of Christ, the reward of eternal life may be given to our worthy and meritorious works; but that Christ's grace may be given to us, whereby we may be enabled worthily to merit this reward."

Let us hear the Decrees of the Council of Trent on this subject:

"If any one shall say, that the good works of a man that is justified are in such wise the gifts of God, as that they are not also the good merits of him that is justified; or, that the said justified, by the good works which are performed by him through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life, if so be, however, that he depart in grace, and, moreover, an increase of glory; let him be anathema." (Sese. vi. Can. 32)

This is the true doctrine of Rome on this great question. To use commercial language, the whole world is bankrupt, Christ comes to it as the possessor of boundless wealth, and gives to everyone who will receive, that he may go and trade there with to realize capital with which to clear off his obligations.

Now this doctrine is untrue; this gospel is a gospel of death! It dishonors Christ and destroys men. The true gospel comes to man, not only as not just, but as dead in trespasses and sins, and provides forgiveness of all their transgressions; it confers upon them a free and full salvation, comprising both a change of state and a change of character, justification, and sanctification, a title to leaven, and a meetness for it, without money and without price.

Thus, while it thoroughly clears away all past grounds of condemnation, it provides for the future by bestowing upon the penitent believer the perfect righteousness of Christ; that is, he is accounted as righteous for the sake of Christ. Up to this point the Scriptures know nothing of any good works but those of Christ; but none such appear: the mercy the believer has received fills him with love, prompts him to do whatever his Lord has commanded.

The tree is now made good, and good fruits follow, and in their absence there is no proof that the tree has been medicated. Such works, however, are not his title to eternal life. He who does such works, works not for life, but from it. Such works will be, nevertheless, rewarded; but eternal life is the free gift of God, through Christ, and wholly independent of any works of merit whatever. For the ungodly, Christ died, and through his death Scripture everywhere testifies the ungodly are justified.
Auricular Confession
Popery ancient and modern by John Campbell D.D. compiled by Dr. Paisley
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

No portion of the Papal system presents more originality than the Confessional. The glory and the infamy of this institution is all its own. The idea never entered into the heads of the men of the ancient world. The patriarchs of mankind knew nothing of it, and the wisest seer of those days never contemplated the rise of such a scheme of deluding and imposing on mankind. As to the great legislator of the Jews, nothing was further from his imagination, nor is a single fact to be found in connection with the customs, rites, or literature of any portion of the Pagan world, from which the existence of the idea would be inferred. It was reserved for " The Man of Sin " to devise and execute this dreadful engine of tyranny and crime in furtherance of his own infernal reign! It is pre-eminently a deed of darkness, having on its forehead the stamp of Lucifer! This, like the other great elements of the Papacy, is founded on a single fragment of the Word of God. There is only one expression, which is available for the operation of the plastic power of the priesthood -James v. 16. " Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availed much." What can be more natural and proper than such an act? If you have committed a fault against a neighbour or a brother in the Lord, you have wounded him, and you have, speaking figuratively, wounded the friendship between you, and this is the only sure way to " heal the breach," which is actually the phrase current among mankind for the re-establishment of friendship. But, that friendship may be restored, there must be forgiveness, and that there may be forgiveness, there must be confession. The injunction is, " If he confess, forgive him," and what more comely and proper than that the restored friendship between two men that fear God, should be cemented by prayer? The same point is referred to by the Lord Himself in his form, " Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us." Paul speaks to the same effect, " Forgiving one another, even as God, for Christ's sake, bath forgiven you." It is curious to observe how cunning overmatches itself. The passage in James, on which the doctrine of Extreme Unction is founded, speaks of anointing with a view to recovery; but the extreme unction of Popery is with a view to death, and is never administered till all hope is gone, and the party is expected speedily to die, and with a distinct understanding that he is to die, and that no more shall be done to save him! Hence the practice, after administering extreme unction, is to withhold food and medicine. The administration of this so-called " Sacrament" constitutes an interdict to all further recourse to either food or medicine; die he must, and there is no help for him! The doctrine of Transubstantiation also rests on a single passage in John vi. which refers solely to the doctrine of the Atonement, and not at all to that of the Lord's Supper; and yet the whole fabric of Transubstantiation and the Mass is founded on a perversion of this single Scripture. Such exactly is the case in the matter of confession. There is but one passage in the whole Word of God that at all admits of being twisted to that purpose; but in the plastic hand of the priesthood this is enough. The word is spoken, and forthwith the fabric of falsehood arises. Now let it be specially noted that, in the words of James the. confession has nothing whatever to do with the priest. The injunction to confess is directed not to the priest but to the people, who are commanded- to confess, not to him, but to each other! Let the reader specially mark the difference.

This is one of those things, which remarkably illustrate Popish progress, showing the necessity of contending with evil in the bud. in harmony with the Scriptures at the outset, the confession was promiscuous. Men. might confess to each other, to laymen or to priests, but it was at length rendered incumbent to do either the one or the other. These strainings of the Word of God paved the way for more. By degrees confession was elevated into a sacrament, which none but a priest might administer, and to that priest every member of the Papal Church roust confess at a fixed period. The next step was to lay down the doctrine, that without this confession there could be no forgiveness, and that the priest, as God's representative, could bestow such forgiveness, and the priest only. This brought matters to a crisis; but even there the climax was not reached, nor even approached. Shame had not wholly fled the brow of the confessor, who had not yet ventured to absolve; he only prayed as follows: - "The Lord grant thee absolution and remission." In process of time, however, as the spirit of impiety waged stronger, and mankind, through increasing darkness, became prepared for further bondage, the demands increased, and prayer gave place to an authoritative act of absolution. The priest attained to the dreadful height of impiety which enabled him to utter the following language:" I absolve thee from thy sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost "-no mean contribution surely to the fulfilment of the prediction, that " The Man of Sin should exalt himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped." The institution might now be said to be complete, and only one thing was wanted to give it an authoritative stamp, and secure universal compliance with its dictum; and this was reserved for that impious convention known as the Council of Trent, which had the audacity thus to speak concerning it: -" The Universal Church has always understood that a full confession of sins was instituted by the Lord as a part of the Sacrament of Penance, and that it is necessary by the Divine appointment for all who sin after baptism, because our Lord Jesus Christ, when he was about to ascend from the earth to heaven, left his priests in his place as presidents and judges, to whom all mortal offences, into which the faithful might fall, should be honestly and fully submitted, that they might pronounce sentence of remission, or retention of sins, by the power of the keys:' Thus, then, by a falsehood the most daring, these men give the stamp of their authority to the so-called Sacrament of Confession. But this baleful confederacy against God and man did not leave the matter here. Delighting to pour out curses on the Protestants, they thus decided: " If any one shall deny that sacramental confession was instituted, or is necessary, by Divine right to salvation, or shall say that the practice of private confession, to a priest is foreign from the institution and command of Christ, and is only a human invention; let him be accursed."

What says the reader to this? The choice is given to men that know the Scriptures and fear God, of either conniving at falsehood, or being subjected to an anathema! Thus the whole institution is clothed in falsehood and steeped in impiety! A curse is here fulminated against the whole Protestant world, which the fierce spirit of Antichrist, were his power equal to his malice, would convert into a hell of torture to every soul who is prepared to stand by the Scripture law, " Let God be true, and every man a liar!" Before mankind can receive the doctrine of Auricular Confession, the light which is in them must first be darkened, till reason be utterly blinded, and conscience either seared as with a hot iron, or surrendered to the keeping of the priest, it is impossible for this institution to obtain general currency. It is the perfection of iniquity; its history, after its complete establishment, is one of unmingled infamy. It cannot be read without ineffable disgust and horror! It has been fraught with a double curse - a curse to the priest, and a curse to the people! In wickedly debasing them, he has sorely debased himself. The vampire and his victim have descended together into the depths of sin and wretchedness! Nothing ever happened among men so illustrative of the Scripture that "the wicked shall be filled with their own devices." Had the spirits of Pandemonium consulted together by what means they might best create on earth, a preparatory school for the great work of turning men into devils, they could have hit upon nothing so adapted as Auricular Confession, in the hands of a godless priesthood, the priest himself being intended to occupy the highest place, and to become the chief fiend! His crime, in part, was his punishment. In addition to his own share of inbred depravity, the corruption of a whole parish is constantly being poured into his bosom! His breath is the reservoir into which all their hearts, as so many fetid streams of depravity and impurity. discharge themselves. All those evils set forth in Scripture - " evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false-witness, blasphemies "keep rushing on in a torrent from day to day into the dark and foul abyss of his soul! A dozen or a score years of a life so spent, would serve to convert an angel into a demon! Thus the soul of the priest becomes the dread depository of the collective iniquity of multitudes. Simply to sit, as a silent auditor of the endless recitals of all sorts of iniquity, might suffice to assimilate a man to Satan, rendering a creature, whose days are but a handbreadth, as much an adept in iniquity as a being who has lived and transgressed a thousand years! But the priest is not a mere passive receiver of this aggregate wickedness; were such the fact, it would be innocence itself compared with the part, which, by the laws of his order, he is obliged to play in this tragedy of death. He is bound, in effect, to tutor the souls of his people in the science and practice of transgression. Himself a professional teacher of evil, the great subject of his study is, not the Ward of God, but the heart of man; it is his duty to sound the depth of the depravity of the human soul, -to familiarize himself with all the springs of sin, to search out the sources of temptation, with the peculiar, as well as the common methods of warring against the Lord: in a word, he is bound to perfect himself in the science of turpitude -a course but too congenial to human nature, and which becomes the more sweet, the more its depravity is developed, and the more it has grown up in all things into Apollyon the Destroyer

Such is the daily and nightly study of a Popish priest; nor is this study prosecuted abstractedly and in solitude with his own soul for its subject; the hearts around him are laid open to his gaze, and are ever exposed to his experiments. The young and the old, the rich and the poor, the vulgar and the refined, male and female, the virtuous and the profligate-humanity in all its modifications of state, condition, and circumstance, is the subject on which he conducts his fearful experiments. His system of interrogation is an instrument of a thousand screws fixed on all parts of the human heart, by which, in the mass, they are dragged forth into view. Perfected himself in the knowledge of all wickedness, he diffuses that knowledge on every side, and thus multiplies his own moral likeness among his people. His questions descend, as the plunge of a poignard into the soul, and penetrate it in its deepest recesses; by the operation of the Confessional, iniquity in all its ramifications is taught upon system, and a community of knowledge is established in the congregation or the parish. All souls are rendered familiar with all sins, with all occasions of sin, with all accompaniments of sin, with all consequences of sin, with all the modifications of sin! Thus the whole world of iniquity is laid bare, both to the eye of the priest, and to sinners themselves. Under the pretence that as the priest is both judge and physician, he must know all sin in thought, word, or deed, that he may determine the conditions of absolution, and prescribe the method proper for cure. The priest, sitting as God, must know, and demands to know, all that can be known by God

In dealing with this subject, we feel ourselves laid under the most enfeebling restraints-restraints utterly incompatible with even an approach to a full and adequate discussion. The moral feelings of British society would be altogether outraged even by such an approach. It would fill the virtuous and devout with intolerable loathing, and, among very many, it would fail to obtain belief. The system has reared, from age to age, an army of men for its own service, such as could not have been supplied even by heathen idolatry in the darkest ages of Paganism. As an Order, they have stood alone, peerless in their impiety, and in their profligacy. Unrestrained by any regard to either God or man, they give the rein to their worst passions, and make havoc of the human race! One feature of this system is so remarkable as to call for special consideration; as if to give full effect to the Satanic principle of the confessional, it was ordained that the priest must be severed from society and all its sympathies, and pass his days in a state of celibacy. This provision alone was wanted to perfect the machinery of moral destruction. The Father Confessor, uninfluenced by the grace of God, is at the mercy of his passions, combined with the temptations which surround him; from the nature of his office, he is placed in circumstances of the strongest temptation, with every inward incentive, and every outward facility, for the perpetration of iniquity. Is it then, to be wondered at, if men so situated fall, where they do not desire to stand? Is it to be wondered at, if such men in every land, and in every succeeding age, have become the despoilers of virtue? Is it to be wondered at, if woman was ruined, and man dishonoured? On this subject, were we to suffer history to step forth and deliver her full testimony, years would be required to recite the dreadful chronicle, which would be written within and without, with lamentation and mourning and woe! Who shall enumerate the millions that have cursed the day they first appeared at the Confessional, and thus came under the influence of the foul spirit that presided in it? Spain, Portugal, Italy, Austria, France, and every other country where the Pope has borne sway, is strewed with the wrecks arising from priestly profligacy! They have been the patrons and promoters of vice the most hateful. and the most destructive. Their mission has been, not to bless, but to curse the people-not to bring health and happiness, but to diffuse pestilence and death! Mankind have groaned in hopeless anguish under the dreadful burden-! It rested, and in spite of the light of' the Reformation and the mitigated circumstances of modern times, it still continues to rest on them, with the weight of a mountain, repressing their energies whether of body or of mind, converting nations into one vast prison-house of intellectual and moral bondage. All mental freedom is overthrown, and the mind of the people is merely the mind of the priesthood. The thick darkness which broods on those lands hides from the world their true moral condition, which is got at under great difficulties, and at best but imperfectly developed.

We cannot take leave of the subject, without solemnly pressing it upon our readers, that the magnitude and the enormity of the evil, which the language we have employed may suggest, comes far short of the true state of the case. Let them not for a moment suppose there must be exaggeration, for to exaggerate in this matter were utterly impossible! The difficulty is, to attain to expression adequate in any measure, to set forth the truth.

The question then, we have now to put to every reader, is-Do you wish to see the system of Auricular Confession, restored to its ancient sway in the British Isles 2 By all that is sacred in relation to the purity of woman, the peace of families and the welfare of society, we implore you to ponder the question! It is pregnant with meaning of unutterable moment! It is one of wide range, comprising everything affecting human institutions, and the progress of .the race in wisdom, virtue, liberty and, happiness. Auricular Confession is a huge imposture, laden with every evil; not only is it without foundation in the Word of God, but at utter variance with right reason. The priest is thereby raised into a demon, in his own person uniting the professed pardon of the highest crimes, with the fresh perpetration of them! The Confessional has, to an extent incalculable, -been but another name for seduction, and seduction has oft been but the prelude of murder! What tales might be told by the lime-pits, the subterranean passages, and the spirits of murdered infants

But just in proportion as Auricular Confession exalts the priesthood, it degrades the people. The! presence of the priest invariably divests the disciple of his manhood, and turns him into a crawling reptile of the dust! He cannot stand erect in the presence of the person who knows all his weakness, and all his sins in thought, word, and deed! The eye of his tyrant looks him through and through; and its glance falls upon him as the withering blight of heaven! He quakes, as a spaniel, before his ghostly oppressor! His soul is bound in fetters, and none can deliver him.

Let every man then, as he values his personal liberty, the moral purity of his country, set his face as a flint against the system, of which Auricular Confession is an integral part, and let him unite with all good men in every wise and well directed scheme, to work its overthrow in these realms. As a plant, which God hath not planted, let all godly and patriotic Englishmen combine to uproot it from the land!
The Rule of Faith
Popery ancient and modern by John Campbell D.D. compiled by Dr. Paisley
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

In dealing with Popery, we affirm that the Sacred Scriptures are in very deed, the Word of God; an express revelation of the Divine will on every subject which man is concerned to know, and that they are the standard by which all doctrine and all systems. Everything appertaining to religion must be tested. The great point, therefore, is, to ascertain what they state. And thus the question primarily is one of language.

It is proper to enquire into the established import of the separate words, and into the meaning of any given combination of words formed into sentences, paragraphs, or books. In determining these questions, it is permitted us to use the entire apparatus of literature, as we would in an endeavour to interpret a Greek orator, poet, or historian.

The spiritual teaching by which men are made wise unto salvation is not our present subject; we are only concerned with the entire sufficiency and the supreme authority of the Sacred Volume. To this we are willing to bring Protestant doctrine, morality, office, order, worship, and polity, and at once surrender whatever cannot be defended or supported by it in a fair, obvious, honest sense, without gloss, stain, or perversion; and by the same rule, we claim the right to test whatever appertains to Popery.

We shall accept and uphold everything in it that stands approved by the Word of God, but dispute and reject whatever has not its sanction and is directly in contradiction to it. This is our great and fundamental principle, from which we can be induced in no respect and in no degree to depart; and if Papists shall adopt the same rule, there will be a foundation laid for reasonable discussion, and possibly, at last, a means of reaching a satisfactory conclusion.

We are met, however, at the very outset, with insurmountable difficulties to anything like a rational hope of adjustment, and are compelled to enter upon a contest relative to first principles. The entire sufficiency of the Sacred Scriptures is boldly denied and vehemently contended against. It is maintained, not only that they are not sufficient, but that they are scarcely at all necessary, and that the affairs of the world's salvation can be carried on as well-if not considerably better-without them, since, to the bulk of mankind, there is very great danger arising from their general use; and that it is therefore much better that the people should not be troubled with them, but take the sum total of their instructions from the lips of the priests.

Again, the right of private judgment in the interpretation of the Scriptures is wholly denied, and declared to be fraught with the most perilous consequences to the true interests of mankind. Papists allow no exercise of private judgment in this matter, but insist that the Sacred Scriptures must be received in the sense that the Church of Rome puts upon them. Here there is another fundamental principle. As Protestants, we earnestly contend for the right of private judgment, and hold that if this is to be surrendered, we may just as well at once give up the Word of God. The Scriptures would then cease to be the test and standard of the Church and of things connected with it; the Church, oil the contrary, would then become the sole and only standard of the Scriptures, and everything contained therein, so that they might by all be at once abandoned.

But it is held by Papists that the Sacred Scriptures, even as interpreted by the Church, are wholly insufficient as a guide in matters spiritual, and must be supplemented by what is called tradition, which means things professed to have been held and taught in the days of the Apostles, although there is no mention of them in the Sacred Word. Of these things, the Church is held to be the true and sole depositor. This tenet constitutes the chief field of controversy between Papists and Protestants, and lies at the foundation of their conflict. It is fraught with the greatest possible danger, and lays a ground broad enough for a world of error and, imposture.

"It is the tradition of the Church," is the ready answer to every objection ; and they who allow the doctrine of tradition. have no alternative but either to receive it as such, or to dispute the allegation and endeavour to show that it could not be a tradition derived from the Apostles, forasmuch as it can be proved to have come into being at a period long after their day-an inconvenience which is to be best prevented by keeping the people in utter ignorance, which has from time immemorial been the rule of the Romish Church.

But even here, a way of retreat is ever left open, through the rule that the Church has a right to decree rites and ceremonies, and that all such enactments are clothed with superior authority over the conscience. In this way, the subjects of the Papal kingdom are wrapped in chains, and fixed in hopeless bondage. They have no other law than the will of the priesthood-a law which is unwritten, and consists wholly of the caprices of each successive generation. Under these circumstances, nothing remains for Protestants but to commence a war with the Church of Rome on the very ground of first, principles.

We deny her right to create either rites or ceremonies or to enact anything that shall be binding on the conscience; we reject and resent all her attempts so to do, as an interference with the liberties which Christ has conferred upon his people, and with his own right to govern them. We utterly reject her whole system of tradition, on ground that it was all originated in ages subsequently to that of the Apostles, that it is fraught with folly, mischief, and danger, to the souls of men, and that it is abhorrent alike to reason and to revelation allegations all capable of proof, and which have been proved a thousand times.

The entire sufficiency and exclusive authority of the Sacred Scriptures is a vital principle; the whole controversy turns upon this one point-to settle this, is, in effect, to settle everything; to set aside this, is to set aside the authority of God, and put in its place that of men, which is one of our chief accusations against the Papal priesthood, whom' we charge with usurping the place of the Lord' Jesus Christ.

God alone speaks in Scripture, man, alone speaks in tradition. In Popery, Scripture is made to flee before the face of tradition. Scripture is nothing, tradition is everything. Tradition is not satisfied with being an equal; it is a rival, and, claims to usurp the place of inspiration. Popish tradition and Sacred Scripture can no more be made to harmonize, than light and darkness, truth and falsehood. They are at utter and eternal variance., No fact is better established than that the Pope and his clergy are the enemies of the Sacred Scriptures This has been manifested in various ways; we may instance the following:

First -Violent Hostility to Bible Societies-. We instance this at the outset, because it is an event! of more recent times, occurring in our own day, and therefore capable of proof, in a manner admitting, of no denial, even by the priesthood themselves, who boast of their enmity. It has, moreover, a special value attaching to it. It is the deed, not of ancient or middle-age Popery, for which effeminate, Protestants, whose forbearance and charity are greater than their knowledge and discretion, might feel disposed to make allowance, but of the Popery of the present day.

Our proofs are at hand. Pius VII, in 1816, describes the Bible Society as ---a most crafty device, by which the very foundations of religion are undermined, "a ---pestilence," a "defilement of the faith, most imminently dangerous to souls." Pope Leo XII, in 1824, uses language still more explicit. He says, " The Bible Society strolls with effrontery through the world, contending the traditions of the Holy Fathers, and contrary to the well-known decree of the Council of Trent, labours with all its might, and by every means, to translate, or rather to pervert, the Holy Bible, in the vulgar language of every nation, from which proceeding, it is greatly to be feared, that what is ascertained to have happened to some passages, may also occur with regard to others-to wit, that by a perverse interpretation, the Gospel of Christ may be turned into a human Gospel, or what is still worse, into the Gospel of the Devil."

Such was the Papal opinion of 1821. In 1832, when Gregory XVI. occupied the Chair of Peter, so called, he echoed the testimony of his predecessors ; and Pope Pius IX the present occupant, so late as 1846 thus expressed himself: -This insidious Bible Society, renewing the craft of the ancient heretics, cease not to obtrude upon all kinds of men, even the least instructed, gratuitously, and at immense expense, copies in vast numbers of the books of the Sacred Scriptures, translated (against the holiest rules of the Church) into various vulgar tongues, and very often, with the most perverse and erroneous interpretations, to the end that (Divine tradition, the doctrine of the fathers of the Catholic Church being rejected) every one may interpret the revelation of the Almighty according to his own private judgment, and perverting their sense, fall into the most dangerous error, which society, our predecessor, Gregory XVI., of blessed memory, reproved by his apostolic letters, and we desire equally to condemn."

Thus much for a succession of four Popes, all of our own times. Surely after this there can be no, mistake as to the light in which Popery views institutions whose simple object it is to diffuse the Word of God "without note or comment." But perhaps it may be said that this hatred is founded in the fact that such societies originated with Protestants, and have been conducted by Protestants, which has excited prejudices on the part of the; Popedom. Such apology, however, will not avail for before such societies arose, and before Protestantism, as a communion, existed, Popery everywhere pursued a kindred course.

Secondly Withholding Scriptures from the People. What is the inference that every man of sense ought to draw from this fact? Is not the presumption very strong, that there was some adequate reason for adopting such a course?

It is a fact, established beyond all possibility of rational contradiction, that the Jewish Scriptures were the common property of the Jewish people, whose law provided for the public reading of them, for their domestic use and personal study. It is a fact not less certain that the Apostles wrote their Epistles, not exclusively to the pastors of the day; or rather, in fact, not to them at all, but to the Churches throughout the whole world, and that to the Churches, not to the pastors, all the Church Epistles were, without exception, transmitted.

This is a remarkable circumstance; the Apostles had no fear lest the people should not understand them, or lest they should abuse them. It is not less certain that throughout the whole earth the Scriptures were constantly read in Christian assemblies and in private families, and studied without let or hindrance by individuals. On what authority, then, it maybe asked, does the Papal priesthood withhold these Scriptures from the people? Is it possible not to entertain a suspicion that there are reasons for it reasons founded in some radical difference between the character and the constitution of the Apostolic and the Romish Churches ? But this is not all, nor is it the most serious view of the matter. The Papal priesthood, seeing they could not entirely withhold the Divine Word from mankind, have systematically proceeded to falsify it. We say, then,

Thirdly Falsifying The Scriptures. This act, alike perilous and impious, they have done for reasons, of course, sufficient to impel them to a deed so full of crime and danger. They have, in this great thing of God, done that which, had it referred to the affairs of men, would have branded them with infamy, and in some ages and in many lands cost them their liberty, their country, or their lives! Is the allegation disputed?

We shall prove it. It is probable out readers were not prepared for the facts we shall allege; since the wickedness implied is all but incredible. Nor is if in small matters, but in things most intimately affecting the lives of men,. and the kingdom of God that it is displayed. For instance, the word "Repentance," the first step in, flight, from the wrath to come, is actually translated "Penance."

In Job xlii. 6, for example, "Therefore I repent myself, and do penance in dust and ashes;" again, in Ezekiel xviii. 21, "If the wicked do penance for his sins which he hath committed," and so on; and again, in 1 Kings viii. 47, "If they do penance in their heart, in the place of their captivity;" again, in Matthew iv. 17, "Do penance, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand and again, in Acts xxvi. 20, where the matter is brought forward with such solemnity by the Apostle, as the first lesson he had to communicate to the, Gentiles, we have, "That they should do penance, and turn to God, doing works worthy of penance."'

Thus, then, that the unscriptural, pernicious. and delusive doctrine of penance may be apparently sustained by Scripture, the Word of God is wholly perverted and a something put in the place of repentance which has no relation whatever to it! This doing of penance is actually put in the place of the righteousness of Christ and hence the gloss of that important Scripture, "Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, whose sins are covered," runs thus: "Blessed are they who, by doing penance, have obtained pardon and remission of their sins and are also covered; that is, newly clothed with the habit of grace, and vested with the stole of charity."

But the matter ends not here. The very commandments have been tampered with. For example, Butler's Catechism, used among the poor Irish, reduces the whole of the commandments to a few words; and the spelling-book, used in the Italian schools, thus presents the Fourth Commandment: "Remember to keep holy the days of Festival." An earlier version of the Scriptures was thus rendered, that it might support the Mass. The words, Acts xiii. 2, "As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted are translated, "As they offered to the Lord the sacrifice of Mass, and fasted."

Tradition is thus supported: 1 Cor. xi. 2 is rendered, "The faith which has been once given to the saints by tradition;'' and to give sanction to the seven sacraments, and especially to make a sacrament of marriage (1 Cor. vii. 10), is translated, "Do not join yourselves in the sacrament of marriage with unbelievers." A similar rendering has been employed to sustain human merit. Heb. xiii. 16 is rendered, "We obtain merit towards God by such sacrifices"

Even purgatory itself has had a helping hand from the pen of the false translator: 1 Cor. iii. 1.5 is thus rendered, "He himself shall be saved, yet in all cases as by the fire of purgatory" We might go further, but surely this may suffice to illustrate the liberties which have been taken with the Word of God.

The fact, then, is clear beyond reasonable dispute. Will it End, in any man of sense, an apology? If so, we shall supply the apologist with another consideration, by giving him to understand that,

Fourthly. -The Popish Priesthood have destroyed the Word of God-. Does the reader shudder at such an allegation? He well may; but it is not the less true. In Great Britain, in Ireland, on the Continent of Europe, and wherever Popery has had a foundation, history most abundantly testifies to the truth of this dreadful fact. The Popish priesthood know and feel that their system is not only not 'based upon the Word of God, but utterly opposed to it.

They have most abundantly shown that nothing is wanted but the power to remove that Word entirely from the face of the earth. The spirit of Popery and the spirit of the Bible are as opposite as light and darkness; and thus, it is with the rule of faith. The Spirit of God speaks in the Bible, and the spirit of Popery in tradition, and their distinctive utterances it is impossible to harmonize; the Bible-burners of Popery and the living temples of the Holy Ghost are as diverse the one! from the other as truth and falsehood, angels and devils!

Even in Canada, Bible-burning is a special priestly pastime! Unhappy Ireland has everywhere, and for ages been signalised by it. So late as the beginning of 1848 twenty-two, Bibles were burned in the street of a chief town, hundreds of spectators dancing and yelling around the fire, while the priest sat at the window of a house, illumined for the occasion, drinking his wine, and evidently enjoying the horrible scene! Within a few days of the time at which we write, the priests of Italy burned large quantities of the Word of God.

We submit to all men of sense that this single point the light in which Popery views, and the treatment which it offers to the Word of God - ought to be decisive of the whole question. They are shut up to one of two conclusions-either Popery is not of God, or the Bible is not of God; and with this fact before them, they are to make their choice. If, however, Popery be not of God, it must be of the Wicked One. This inference there is no resisting; and its importance is all the greater, because it serves to explain a system otherwise inexplicable-a system, every part of which militates against the glory of God, and the best interests, both for time and eternity, of his creatures.
Let Luther speak for himself
Extracts from the Great Reformer's writings as selected by Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley, M.P., M.E.P., M.L.A.
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

"I am born to be a rough controversialist," says Luther. "I clear the ground, pull up the weeds, fill up ditches, and smooth the roads; but to build, to plant, to sow, to water, to adorn the country, belongs to Melanchthon."

"My style, rude and skilful, vomits up a deluge, a chaos of words, boisterous and impetuous as a wrestler contending with a thousand successive monsters; and, if I may presume to compare small things with great, methinks there has been vouchsafed me a portion of the four-fold spirit of Elijah, rapid as the wind and devouring as fire, which roots up mountains and dashes rocks to pieces; and to thee, on the contrary, the mild murmur of the light and refreshing breeze. I feel, however, comfort from the consideration that our common Father hath need, in this His immense family, of each servant; of the hard against the hard, the rough against the rough, to be used as a sharp wedge against hard knots. To clear the air and fertilise the soil, the rain which falls and sinks as the dew is not enough – the thunder-storm is still required." (August 20th, 1530.)

I am far from believing myself without fault; but I can, at least, glorify myself with St. Paul, that I cannot be accused of hypocrisy, and that I have always spoken the truth, perhaps, it is true, a little too harshly; but I would rather sin in disseminating the truth with hard words, than shamefully retain it captive. If great lords are hurt by them, they can go about their own business, without thinking of mine or of my doctrines. Have I done them wrong or injustice? If I sin, it will be for God to pardon me."

Such was Luther, and Knox was worthy of him.

No prophet ever shrank from his mission with more distress than Luther; on November 29th, 1521, he wrote thus to the Austin Friars of Wittenberg:

"Daily I feel how difficult it is to divest oneself of scruples long entertained. Oh! The pain it has cost me, though with the Scriptures before me, to justify myself to myself, for daring singly to set myself up against the Pope, and hold him as Antichrist! What tribulations have I not suffered! How often have I not addressed to myself in bitterness of the spirit the arguments of the Papists: 'Art thou alone wise? Are all others in error? Can they have been so many years deceived? What if thou deceivest thyself, and draggest along with thee in thy error so many souls to everlasting damnation?' Thus I used to argue within myself until Jesus Christ with His own, His infallible Word, fortified me, and strengthened my soul against such arguments, as a rock raised above the waves laughs their fury to scorn." (Letters, Vol. 2, p. 107.)

When Luther was summoned to retract his doctrines, he nobly replied:

"The second part of my books is what I have written against the Papacy and the Papists, and not against them individually or personally, but against their most shameful doctrines and practices, by which they have demoralised the whole Christian world both in body and soul. It can neither be denied nor dissembled, what the experience and the complaints of the whole world acknowledge, that the consciences of faithful men have been grieved, tortured, and harrowed by the Papal dogmas, especially in this renowned empire of Germany, distracted by a tyranny almost incredible, shamefully deforming everything without remorse, and regardless of the means by which it is effected; and yet, when any individuals are themselves convinced that the Papal laws and dogmas are contrary to the Gospel and the opinions of the Fathers, they are instantly condemned as heretics and reprobates. If, therefore, I were to retract this part of my books, I would relinquish everything, and I would give additional impulse to a tyranny already insupportable. I would not only, by this conduct, open windows, but even doors, to impiety, already so horrible, so grievously felt, and so widely extended, as to make it the most licentious, intolerable, and shameful system which the world ever witnessed. By the help of God, humble though I am, I shall not lend my feeble aid to prop such a system of iniquity and oppression."

Luther said, on his return to Augsburg, that if he had four hundred heads, he would rather lose them all, than revoke his article on faith. "No man in Germany, says Hutten, "despises death more than Luther."

Was it not in character for such a man, in reply to such a proposal, so to express himself? Hear him again:

"It was in the year 1517, when the profligate monk Tetzel, a worthy servant of the Pope and the Devil – for I am satisfied that the Pope is the agent of the Devil on earth – came among us selling indulgences, maintaining their efficacy, and impudently practising on the credulity of the people. When I beheld this unholy and detestable traffic taking place in open day, and thereby sanctioning and encouraging the most villainous crimes, I could not, although I was then a young Doctor in Divinity, refrain from protesting against it in the strongest manner, not only as directly contrary to the Scriptures, but as opposed to the canons of the Church."

Well might the Reformer, under the circumstances, exclaim:

"Farewell, Rome, most accursed abomination! Thou containest so much folly and impiety, that thou are unworthy even to be refuted. Openly hast thou declared, by this infamous procedure, in what spirit thou hast promulgated the detestable bull."

Let those who reserve all their viperation for Knox and Luther, and all their sympathy for their enemies, reflect on the deeds of the latter. He says:

"The edict condemning my book was drawn up, I have been told, by Aleandro, a man zealous enough in the service of his masters, the Pope and the Devil. In that edict I was termed a demon in the shape of a man, and in the dress of a monk. The people were exhorted to seize me and my friends, to destroy our property, and burn our productions! Those monsters gave it out that whoever murdered me would render a good service to the Church; but I have been spared to fight against their iniquities, and to wage war against their metropolis of blasphemy. I have seen the fruits of my labours, and I give thanks to God for it this day. It is His doing – it is marvellous in my eyes."

Such was the city Luther was adjured by his friends not to enter, when he bravely replied:

"Were there as many devils in Worms as there are roof-tiles, I would go on." Alone in that assemblage, before all emperors, and principalities, and powers, spoke he forth these final and ever memorable words: "It is neither safe nor prudent to do aught against conscience. Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise. God help me! Amen!"

Let us hear the glorious man again, when carried away by the Elector, and hidden from his bloodthirsty enemies in the forest castle of Wartburg:

"When I reflect on these horrible times of blasphemy, I wish my eyes to weep rivers of tears for the unhappy desolation of those souls living under the reign of sin and perdition. The monstrous Chair at Rome, placed in the midst of the church, affects to honour God; the pontiffs pretend to render Him homage, while the pretenders to piety outrage His laws; in short, according to them, there is nothing which they would not undertake for His service. Meanwhile, Satan is on the alert; his heart is yearning for the destruction of men, and he opens wide his mouth of torment. He delights in the perdition of men! Here I do nothing all day; I am in idleness; I merely eat and drink. The only consolation is my Bible, which I regularly peruse in both Greek and Hebrew. I intend to write a tract on auricular confession. I am resolved also to continue my annotations on the Book of Psalms, and the books and documents which I have received from Wittenberg will greatly aid me."

Who will deny that such language is authorised, nay, demanded, by the occasion? Let us hear the illustrious Advocate, still in his forest castle, again:

"Poor brother that I am, living in a desert, and in captivity, see what a conflagration I have again kindled! I have burnt a large hole in the pocket of the Papists: I have attacked the Confessional!" What can I do now, or what shall I hereafter do? Where will they find a sufficient quantity of brimstone, bitumen, iron, and wood, to burn to ashes such a heretic as I am? They will be hardly able to raise even the windows of the church to allow to the vociferations of their saints and priests to escape against Luther at this sermon. Whatsoever things they may inculcate on the poor people, it is not difficult to preach that which they know and which they have prepared.

"'Kill! Kill!' , they cry; 'kill that heresiarch, who wishes to overthrow the whole ecclesiastical state, who endeavours to erase and eradicate Christianity!' I earnestly hope, if I were worthy, that they would come, and entrust me with the measure of these Fathers; but it is not time yet; my hour is not yet come. Before I die, I must render that generation of vipers more furious. So far as they are concerned, I shall die game."

Writing to his venerable father, he says:

"What is it to me whether the Pope slays me, or condemns me to hell? He cannot raise the dead, and he may slay me as often as he pleases, for I care little for his censures, and, in short, I never wish them to be removed until Rome, that kingdom of abomination and perdition, is destroyed."

Referring to the counsels of the timid, our immortal Reformer says:

"There are many who think and complain that I am too fierce and keen against the Papacy. On the contrary, I lament that I am too mild. I wish I could breath thunderclaps against Pope and Popery, and that every word was a thunderbolt!

"The Kingdom of Christ is a kingdom of mercy, grace, and goodness. The kingdom of the Pope is a kingdom of lies and damnation!"

Is not the language true? If so, is it possible that human vocables cannot be collocated with excessive strength? No phraseology of man can reach the climax of the atrocity which distinguishes the Popish system! Let us again listen to the great Friend of truth, and righteousness, and mankind:

"The Devil is like a fowler; he wrings the necks of the birds he catches, and kills them; he preserves very few alive. Those which allure other birds to his snare, and sing the songs he wants them, he puts into a cage, that by their seducings he may catch more. I hope he will not get me into his cage.

"When I write against the Pope, I am not melancholy, for then I labour with my whole heart, and I write with such joy, that Doctor Reisenpusch not long ago said to me: 'I marvel that you can be so merry.' I replied to him: 'Neither the Devil, his lieutenant the Antichrist of Rome, nor his shaven retinue, can make me sad, for I know that they are Christ's enemies; and therefore I fight against them with all my heart.'"

Brave man! "Well done" is due from earth and heaven to such courage and such devotion! We must cite one passage more, the most violent Luther ever uttered:

"Whether I am censured or not as being too violent on this occasion, I care not. It shall be my glory and honour in future to be accused of tempesting and raging against the Papists. For more than ten years I have humbled myself before them, and given them fair words. They have grown proud and haughty. Well, then, since they are incorrigible, since there is no further hope of shaking their infernal resolutions by mildness, I break with them for ever! I will pursue them with my imprecations without stop or without rest to my tomb! The Papists shall never more have a good word for me! Would that my thunders and my lightnings roared and blazed over their grave!

"I can hardly pray when I think on them without cursing. I cannot say, Hallowed by thy name, without adding, Cursed be the name of the Papists, and of all those who blaspheme God! If I say, Thy kingdom come, I add, Cursed be the Popedom, and all kingdoms that are opposed to Thine! If I say, Thy will be done, I add, Cursed be the designs of the Papists, and of all those – may they perish! – who fight against Thee! In this way I pray daily, and with me all the true faithful in Christ Jesus. Nevertheless, I have a good and loving heart for all the world, and my greatest enemies themselves know this well."
Papal Infallibility
Popery ancient and modern by John Campbell D.D. compiled by Dr. Paisley
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley

Infallibility is a dogma at which the Protestant world has long ceased to look with gravity. Among them it only serves the purposes of humour, mockery, and reproof to self sufficient folly. The claim to infallibility, however, notwithstanding its superlative absurdity, was necessary to the completion of the Papal system, which would otherwise have been wanting in the most material feature of its impiety, while all the other parts would have lacked coherence. Nothing created can be infallible. Infallibility implies self-existence - independence, infinitude, omniscience, omnipotence and eternity.

Infallibility belongs only to God. For a human being to lay claim to it, but for the shocking impiety, would be to excite ineffable ridicule; and were it not for the circumstances under which the claim is made, it would be considered as a freak of lunacy. It is especially with very great incongruity that the professed successors of Peter lay claim to such an attribute, since nothing was further from the mind of Peter himself, and, indeed, nothing was farther from his character. With all his worth, he was anything but a perfect man; of all the Apostles, he had the least claim to such a distinction, for prudence propriety, and general consistency. He admits of comparison with none of them; more defective features came out in his single history than in that of all the rest united, with the exception of Judas; and, indeed, but for the close of his career, even he seems to have been one of the discreetest among them. His very vice was productive of cautious propriety.

Peter, on the contrary, even subsequently to his restoration after his fall, and the baptism of Pentecost, was still attended by his characteristic infirmity. His inconsistency was such, that, on a very memorable occasion, it became necessary for Paul to withstand him to the face, and to rebuke him in the presence of all the people. But with all his imperfections, there is no hazard in affirming that he was incomparably better than the best of his successors so called at Rome the bulk of whom have been the worst of human kind. This is the unanimous voice of history.

No matter; Infallibility was found to be necessary to sustain the claims of the Popedom, and infallibility was arrogated accordingly. The Pope cannot err either in doctrine or in discipline; hence, the world is summoned to implicit submission to all his dogmas, and all his decisions, on pain of damnation! According to that Goliath of Popery, Bellarmine, "If the Pope should command vice, or prohibit virtue, the church is obliged to believe vice to be good and virtue to be evil! All the sanctions of the Apostolic see are so to be understood, as if confirmed by the voice of St. Peter himself; whatsoever the Church, doth determine, whatever it doth appoint, is perpetual and irrevocable, and to be observed by all men." "Christ has bestowed on the Pope, who is Peter's successor, the same infallible spirit that he had; and, therefore, the Pope's decretory letters are to be received as if they were the words of St. Peter, and to be accounted as the very Bible itself."

It is difficult to say whether the impiety or the absurdity of this language be the greater; but surely to state, is sufficiently to expose it to all men of common sense. The doctrine was suited only for children, or for those adults who are but "children of larger growth," although their brainless heads might be clothed with grey hairs. The race of the Popes, happily for the interests of the truth, have found faithful chroniclers of their deeds, and the record is but one mingled mass of impiety, profligacy, and peerless wickedness, all on a scale beyond the average iniquity, even of the worst portion of mankind.

Viewed as a succession, they have but too well sustained the dreadful designation given them by the Holy Spirit the Man of Sin. "In most of them the work of iniquity has been completed;" they have nearly all reached the fullness of the stature of perfect men in enormity; they have, in very deed, been children of the devil, enemies of all good, who have never for a moment ceased "to pervert the right ways of the Lord." Compared with them, the old Emperors of Rome were moralists, and almost saints! There is no crime of which humanity is capable, with which one or other of them has not been chargeable. A portion of them have been monsters rather than men!

Pope Marcellinus sacrificed to idols; Pope Felix was perjured; Pope John denied the immortality of the soul; Leo X was enormity personified; Alexander VI., and several others, were atheists! Even one of the greatest of Papal historians has testified that John XXIII. was "the genius of evil in human shape;" by his own confession, lie was guilty of the most revolting sensuality of simony, of poisoning his predecessor, and a multitude of other crimes, at which humanity shudders.

These are facts; the question, then, is, in what light ought the world to look upon the pretension of such a line of men to Infallibility? Surely among persons of ordinary reason, that question may soon be determined. But before we advance, we must look a little more closely into the subject; and in so doing it is proper to observe that there is no point in which the boasted unanimity of the Catholic Church is so imperfect and untenable. They all agree that there is infallibility somewhere; but there is a dispute as to its scat, whether it be in the Pope, or in General Councils. Even the Council of Trent on this point, as if conscious of danger, has spoken with caution. The following is its deliverance:

"The Church cannot err in delivering Articles of Faith, or Precepts of Morality, inasmuch as it is guided by the Holy Spirit;" and, as a conclusion, they add: "It necessarily follows that all other Churches which falsely claim that name, and being also led by the Spirit of the Devil, are most dangerously out of the way, both in doctrine and practice." This is a compliment to Luther and the Protestants. The Jesuits and a portion of the Romish Divines, however, contend for the Infallibility of the Pope. Another class of them deny this, and insists that the Infallibility rests, not with the Pope, but with the General Council, " viewed as the legitimate organ and representative of the Catholic Church?' This latter class, however, will be considered as but a slight exception to the rule. The notion of personal infallibility in the Pontiff, is the orthodox view, and has -been- such indeed, to the present time. As is obvious from the Encyclical Utter of the present Pope, Pius IX published in 1846, in which he states that " God has constituted a living authority to teach the true sense of his heavenly revelations, and to judge infallibly in all controversies on matters of faith and morals."

There can be no mistake in the language; its import is plain. It claims for Pope Pius IX and his successors entire infallibility. This specimen puts an end to the exercise of popular judgment. How unlike the Apostle Paul, who says to the Corinthians "I speak as unto wise men; judge ye what I say!" Pope Pius IX. will have no "judging" He asks only for doing, and enjoins it under the penalty of perdition! Happily, however, men may reject the dogmas of Pope Plus, and yet be saved; nay, that they may be saved, it must be so! The claim is alike unfounded in reason and in Scripture.

All the attempts to prove it from the latter source are insulting perversions of the Word. We may take an example from Matthew xviii. 20, where the Lord makes a promise of his presence, where two or three" are met together in his name. Will any man for a moment say that these words refer to an Ecclesiastical Council met to decide matters of controversy in doctrine, morals, or discipline? Can anything be more incontrovertibly certain than that they refer exclusively to Social. Prayer? The Papists should consider the consequences of thus tampering with Scripture; and if it proves anything on the subject of Councils, it will prove too much since it will enable a thousand men to constitute 500 general councils. It will farther show that there has been a vast amount of needless expenditure in travelling in past times.

If Christ's being in the midst of them makes them infallible, since it is sure that he will never be worse than his word, it is also certain that if but two or three only shall meet together in his name in London when so met together they will be infallible; and if infallibility may be bad at home, and also at so cheap a rate great fools are they who will put themselves to the trouble and expense of travelling to Rome for it.

The words of the Saviour to Peter have also been specially relied on in Luke xxii. 32, in which he says that he had "prayed for him that his faith may not fail." We offer this as a very striking example of Popish craft and dishonesty. Even a child will see that the Saviour's prayer referred to Peter personally and exclusively, and that even in his case, it referred not to his whole career, but to the coming hour of Satanic temptation, when the enemy should seek to sift them as wheat." The advocates of Popery apply this language to Peter's faith in Christian doctrine, and, placing him first in the Papal chair, make him the federal head of the Papal line, and thus give them all the benefit of the prayer which that Saviour had presented for Peter on a special occasion.

But we will not further disgust our readers. If Infallibility have an existence on earth. it is very clear that it is not in the Pope. Popes have, by decrees contradicted themselves and each other; history abounds with examples of such contradiction, a portion of the Popes, moreover, have been convicted of undoubted heresy. They went not only in the teeth of the acknowledged doctrines of the Sacred Scriptures, even on points in which Protestants and Papists are agreed. Some Popes have been schismatic, and there have been two and even three at the same time warring and hurling anathemas at each other.

Wherever infallibility resides, therefore, it is not in them Is it, then, in General Councils? Perfection is one; could perfect beings thus coexist or did they exist in succession they could never thus have contradicted each other. But councils as well as popes, from the first, have dealt in such contradictions, and that in matters and measures of the most serious character. The Council of Trent, for instance, expunged the decrees of the Councils of Ephesus and of Nice, by greatly multiplying the articles of faith. The Council of Laodicea, in 364 rejected the Apochrypha; the Council of Trent, in 1564, hurled its anathemas against every mail who should not receive and hold every part of that very Apochrypha as inspired and canonical! Other councils acted similarly concerning the use of images, the celibacy of the clergy and other subjects. So much for the infallibility of General Councils!

Such, then, is a general view of this most preposterous dogma of Papal infallibility, and we think it not too much to say, that he who can believe it will find no difficulty in believing anything that may be conveyed in words; proof will neither be wanted nor welcomed, and even plausibility will, perhaps, be deemed an impertinence. It was not without substantial ground that the Church of Rome held and still holds that "ignorance is the mother of devotion," such devotion as that of the Popedorn. Darkness is its native element. Lot the true light of heaven shine upon it, and it is undone Hence the truth, propriety, and force of the apostolic prediction, that the whole of the colossal system shall be destroyed by the Son of God "through the breath of his mouth, and the brightness of his coming." The righteous will pray that the wickedness of the wicked may come to an end, in order to the establishment of the just.

Rome's Perversion of the Ten Commandments
It can plainly be seen that Rome entirely omits the Second Commandment and splits the Tenth into two!
Professor Arthur Noble

They shall go to confusion together that are makers of idols. (Isaiah 45:16)

In the mathematics of the Church of Rome, ten minus one equals ten! This is neither a miracle nor a conjuring-trick, but a blatant and purposeful deception as well as a conscious perversion of the Word of God. It is achieved by deleting the second commandment and making the tenth into two.

In order to excuse the gross idolatry on which her system of worship is founded, the Church of Rome must delete the Second Commandment, which forbids the worship of images:

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments." (Ex. 20:4-6)

Of course, when challenged, the self-professing 'Holy Mother Church' vehemently denies that she practises image-worship, but consider the following from §1161 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church which reinforces the doctrine of the Seventh Ecumenical Council of Nicea (A.D. 787) on images:

"Following the divinely inspired teaching of our holy Fathers and the tradition of the Catholic Church [Note: there is no mention of following the divinely inspired teaching of the Bible] […] we rightly define with full certainty and correctness that, like the figure of the precious and life-giving figure of the cross, venerable and holy images of our Lord and God and Saviour, Jesus Christ, our inviolate Lady, the holy mother of God, and the venerated angels, all the saints and the just, whether painted or made of mosaic or another suitable material, are to be exhibited in the holy churches of God, on sacred vessels and vestments, walls and panels, on houses and on streets."

To designate an image as 'venerable' and 'holy' is blasphemy. The word 'venerable' is derived from the Latin word venerare meaning 'to worship'. Moses was commanded by God: "Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I am the Lord your God." (Lev. 26:1) God calls idols "abominations" (Deut. 29:17). No one or no thing but God is to be worshipped. Accordingly, Jesus, when tempted by the Devil to worship him, said: "Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." (Matt. 4:10)

To bow down to statues and pray, to light candles, to worship a wafer which is a piece of dough, to venerate the relics of 'saints', to kiss crucifixes and adore 'sacred' images or icons of a Madonna – all that is contrary to the teaching of the Bible; yet even the Pope bows down to images of Mary. No wonder Rome banned and burned the Bible and those who preached from it, for her whole system of deception is too easily exposed in light of God's Word.

In fact, she even goes so far as to corrupt her own version of the Bible by deleting the Second Commandment from it, and then proceeds to detract attention from her fallacy by telling her adherents that they are too stupid to understand the Bible without a priest to interpret it for them.

When a comparison is made between the Ten Commandments as set out in the Bible and as formulated by the Church of Rome, the deception becomes clear:

The Bible (KJV)

(Exodus, chapter 20)


The Church of Rome (RSV*)

(Catechism, §2052-2557)

First Commandment

Thou shalt have no other gods before me.


First Commandment

You shall not have other gods besides me.

Second Commandment

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them.


Second Commandment

You shall not take the name of the Lord, your God, in vain.

Third Commandment

Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.


Third Commandment

Remember to keep holy the sabbath day.

Fourth Commandment

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.


Fourth Commandment

Honour your father and your mother.

Fifth Commandment

Honour thy father and thy mother.


Fifth Commandment

You shall not kill.

Sixth Commandment

Thou shalt not kill.


Sixth Commandment

You shall not commit adultery.

Seventh Commandment

Thou shalt not commit adultery.


Seventh Commandment

You shall not steal.

Eighth Commandment

Thou shalt not steal.


Eighth Commandment

You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.

Ninth Commandment

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.



Ninth Commandment

You shall not covet your neighbour's house; you shall not covet your neighbour's wife…

Tenth Commandment

Thou shalt not covet.


Tenth Commandment

You shall not covet anything that is your neighbour's.

It can plainly be seen that Rome entirely omits the Second Commandment and splits the Tenth into two! In order to avoid any possible accusation of not having addressed the forbidden practice of worshipping grave images – which is even mentioned in her own Bible – she tucks away a reference to it in a sub-section (Catechism, §2112-2114) of her commentary on the Biblical First Commandment, defining idolatry as the 'condemnation of polytheism' (belief in many gods) and 'false pagan worship', whilst claiming that ''the Christian [read: 'Roman Catholic'] veneration of images is not contrary to the first [read: 'second'] commandment, which proscribes idols"; for "whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it" (§2132). Good try! The Bible, on the other hand, says: "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." (John 4:24)

The extent to which the Church of Rome can even officially corrupt the Ten Commandments is evident from the book Growing in Christian Morality by Julia Ahlers et al., which bears the Nihil obstat seal of the Vatican certifying publications to be free of 'doctrinal error'. In this book the ninth and tenth commandments according to Rome show a slight variation from the version used in the Catechism, reading "You shall not covet your neighbour's house" and "You shall not covet your neighbour's wife" respectively. The authors of this book even know that the Roman version of the Commandments is deceitful, for they admit: "These are the Ten Commandments, from Exodus, chapter 20, in the traditional way they are enumerated by Catholics." (Emphasis ours.)

*The Church of Rome even corrupts the already corrupted RSV!
The Chamber of Imagery in the Church of Rome
[Part I of 2 parts]
The outward signs of false religion may be the same as the outward signs of the true.
Thomas E. Peck

[Thomas E. Peck (1822-1893) was one of the leaders of the Southern Presbyterian Church in the United States of America. He was in the same school as J.H. Thornwell and R.L. Dabney. He became 'the beloved Instructor' at Union Theological Seminary in Virginia. He was an expositor of truth and an exegete of Scripture and was probably without a rival in his day. His resolute fidelity to Scripture was the secret of his Samson-like strength. His tongue was one of fire, and the men he instructed for the Gospel ministry partook of the sacred flame. His analysis of Popery and his Scriptural exposure of the same were masterly. Would that the fundamental Presbyterians of our day learned the lessons which he most ably taught. Peck's messages against the Roman Antichrist are as vital and timely now as they were when first delivered. His works have recently been republished in three volumes by the Banner of Truth Trust. (I have Anglicised the American spelling. – A. N.)]

One of the most striking features in the aspect of affairs in this country at present is the pervading curiosity of our people in reference to the doctrines of the Church of Rome; and the jealousy, almost universal, in regard to her designs and movements. The sagacious instincts of liberty, coupled with God's blessing upon the faithful and frequent warnings of some eminent patriots, endowed with a larger share of forecast than the mass of their generation, have detected dangers ahead, and the whole nation has been aroused and put in a posture of vigilance and defence. The social and political tendencies of Romanism; its ferocious opposition to civil and religious freedom, in principle, always and everywhere, in practice, whenever and wherever it has not been restrained by policy or power; its audacious interference with the law of marriage, as ordained of God, and as lying at the very foundation of all earthly and temporal relations; its universal and shameless disregard of personal and public morality; its implacable hostility to the best and highest interests of man, for the life that now is – all these aspects of this proud empire have been, of late years, so amply exposed, that thousands of Americans are now awake and watchful, who, not long ago, wore sleeping in the profoundest security, and crying, in their dreams, "peace! peace!"

But these are not the only, or oven the most important, aspects of this "mystery of iniquity". We ought to know it, not only as a tyranny or as an immorality, but also, and mainly, as a heresy – a heresy fundamental and fatal – fundamental in its denial and corruption of the gospel; fatal to the eternal happiness of mankind. All the dreadful names of infamy which may be justly heaped upon Rome are names of honour compared with that of ANTI-CHRIST – ANTI, in both senses of the preposition, against and in the place of; against, because in the place of CHRIST. It is the mystery of iniquity, because it sets itself against, and in the stead of, the mystery of godliness, " God manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory." And unless we take this view of it, and learn to hate it in this view, there is no security against our falling, as a people, under the same dominion which has crushed the life and energy out of nearly all the nations of Christendom, and shut still faster and more hopelessly against them those gates of heaven which its keys were never able to open.

ROME – DIVINE PUNISHMENT ON IDOLATERS

It is never to be forgotten that popery is a judicial infliction upon mankind on account of their unbelief. The advent of the man of sin is thus described by the pen of inspiration : "Whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all (deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie; that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." So long, therefore, as men refuse "to receive the love of the truth," they are in danger of falling under this blighting curse of a righteous Judge.
For when we in our viciousness grow hard,
Oh! misery on't, the wise gods seal our eyes,
In our own filth drop our clear judgements, make us
Adore our errors, laugh at us, while we strut
To our confusion.

MAN'S DAMNING IGNORANCE

No man is safe who is ignorant of the righteousness of God. The necessity of believing something, which is the fundamental and indestructible condition of intellectual activity, may at any time drive a man who has trifled with the majesty of truth and the principles of evidence into a communion which professes infallibly to decide all religious questions, and to relieve from all doubt in regard to a subject upon which all serious doubt must be agony. We are not at all surprised that men of the very first order of mind, and of the highest attainments in all the walks of merely human thought, should throw themselves into the arms of Rome. When Cicero wrote his Treatise on Pagan Theology, history informed him of but three speculative atheists. Since the light of Christianity has dawned upon the world they may be counted by hundreds. In heathendom, every man has a religion and observes some form of worship. In Christendom, there are tens of thousands who have none. Infidelity and superstition, all forms of unbelief, of disbelief, and of misbelief, grow from the same root, the carnal mind, which is enmity against God; they are the unclean birds of night which haunt the darkened shrine, the fallen columns and ruined walls of the human soul, which was created to be the temple of holiness and truth. "This is the condemnation," said he who knew what was in man, "that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds are evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved."

The darkness of popery has special charms for that class of unbelievers who, from the force of education or the natural effects of disappointment and misfortune, have been led to reflect upon their moral condition, and to listen to the voice of conscience. They long for a darkness in which the colours of truth and falsehood, of right and wrong, shall alike be lost; in which they may get rid, at once and forever, of the intolerable misery of thought and the harassing sense of responsibility; in which they may float smoothly along upon the current of impulse, appetite, and passion, with a comfortable persuasion that it can convey them to nothing worse than an ocean of purgatorial fire. "That is an affair of the priest," said the Belgic count, stained with a brother's blood, when urged to prepare for death. He had surrendered his private judgement, and consequently his responsibility. Alas! for the wretchedness of poor human nature, seeking to escape its doom by a voluntary surrender of all that made it the image and glory of God, and degrading itself to the level of the brutes that perish! This is the intellectual death which thousands have found, which thousands more have sought, but have not found, though they have dug for it as for hid treasures.

THE GILDED CROSSES UPON ROME'S TEMPLES

That which invests popery with this tremendous power to entrap and destroy, to blind and kill men, to buy and sell and make merchandise of their souls, is suggested in the title of this article. It is the chamber of imagery in the very temple of the Lord. It professes to hold the great principles of the gospel, but really denies them and tramples them under foot. Its real doctrines are the images of the true; its worship a counterfeit of the true worship of God. It becomes all things to all men in the largest sense: to the heathen as heathen, to the Christian as Christian, if by any means it may destroy some. The gilded crosses upon their temples reflect the earliest rays of the morning, and the last rays of the setting sun linger upon them; but the meaning of the symbol is, "Christ crucified afresh, and put to open shame", within the gloomy walls below. It professes to represent, by its external unity, the one only true church and body of Christ, out of whose pale there is no salvation; it is really the unity of a vast and complicated machine, in which immortal men are mercilessly ground to powder. It professes to be the pillar and ground of the truth; it is really the strongest prop and bulwark of Satan's kingdom on earth. It professes to be the church founded upon the rock; it is really the gates of hell.

It has been often observed that the majority of men look only at the outward signs of things. "The outward signs of a dull man and a wise man are the same, and so are the outward signs of a frivolous man and a witty man." And, in like manner, the outward signs of false religion may be the same as the outward signs of the true. The image and superscription of the spurious coin are accurately copied from the true. The misery is, that in the matter of religion men will not go to the trouble of weighing the coin in the scales of eternal truth; they are satisfied with the beauty of the stamp, and, as they find very little use for religion in the trade and business of life, the mistake is seldom discovered until they and their fancied wealth are together condemned and rejected in another world. The case is even stronger. than this. As it is by the outward signs they regulate their judgement, the more ostentatiously the signs are paraded by any form of religion, the fairer chance it has of being accepted as the true. Crosses, surplices, gowns, altars and what not, pass for religion, while the modest graces of the Spirit, faith, love, temperance, mercy and the rest, having no pomp and circumstance to recommend them, are overlooked and despised. It ought to make a man blush for his race, that bold, impudent and constant assertion of extraordinary and exclusive pretensions is, to so great an extent, successful in securing a passive acquiescence in such pretensions. We way remember, however, that the Pharisees, with their long robes, long faces and long prayers, boasting that they were the temple, and the only temple, of the Lord, were pronounced by him who read their hearts to be a generation of vipers that could not escape the damnation of hell. And yet they were adored by the multitude, who are ever ready to sell the truth and never ready to buy it.
The Chamber of Imagery in the Church of Rome
[Part 2 of 2 parts]
The duty of the church is plain. It is to set forth the mystery of godliness, and in contrast with it and explanation of it, the mystery of iniquity.
Thomas E. Peck

ROME: THE CORPSE OF TRUE CHRISTIANITY

It is one of the most universal characteristics of mankind to cling tenaciously to the forms and representatives of whatever has been once valued, loved, honoured or revered. How long and with how much jealousy did the ancient Romans cling to the forms and signs of their free republic, after the substance was gone, and they were groaning under a despotism well-nigh absolute! What passionate kisses are imprinted upon the marble features of the lifeless body which once shrined a spirit pure and noble, the object of affection and respect! So is it with religion. When the experience of the power of the truth of God has been lost; when men have ceased to taste and see that the Lord is good; when there is no more pungent and radical conviction of their needs as subject to guilt and misery, and, consequently, no more conviction of the necessity and priceless value of a Saviour's atoning blood and sanctifying Spirit; when the perception of the true glory of Christian worship, simple, manly and spiritual, consisting in fellowship with God and the divinely-ordained expression of that fellowship, has been destroyed, or, in a great degree, impaired; when, in a word, nothing but the corpse of religion remains, the most is made of that corpse. It is bedecked and beautified, it lies in state, it is visited rind gazed upon with emotions approaching to idolatry. Such a corpse of Christianity is the Church of Rome. Let us look at it in a few particulars:

I. It is a cardinal truth of Christianity that Jesus Christ, in his person and grace, is to be proposed and represented to men as the principle object of their faith and love.

The Saviour being, as to his divine nature, invisible to us and as to his human nature gone beyond the reach of mortal vision, must be represented to our minds in some way, or he can never be the object of our faith and love. This representation is made in the gospel and in the sacraments, by which he is "before our eyes evidently set forth, crucified amongst us". "We all, with unveiled face, beholding, as in a glass, the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." We have four different portraits, so to speak, drawn by those who lived in familiar intercourse with him, who listened every day to the gracious words which issued from his mouth, who witnessed his wonderful works of beneficence and power, and saw the tears which demonstrated that the Man was tenderly alive to all the impressions of human woe. He is presented to us in a great variety of lights and attitudes to render our conception of him as round and full as our limited capacities will allow, and all this under the inspiration of God. At the same time we have no minute description of his bodily form or features, in order, as it might seem, to rebuke beforehand the presumptuous folly or misguided affection which should lead the church to attempt to reproduce them upon canvas, or in marble, wood or metal. The perception of Jesus is a spiritual perception by faith. Faith goes to him in distress, leans upon him for support, communes with him in joy, fights for him against the world, the flesh and the devil, and looks for that blessed hope and his glorious appearing, when its office shall cease amid the splendours of the vision beatific. Now we see, as by a glass, darkly; and even these dim reflections of the beauty of our King cannot be perceived by us till he, by his Spirit, opens and purges our eyes. Nothing is more natural, then, when the conviction exists that Christ ought to be habitually present to the mind, and yet the spiritual illumination, by which alone he can be perceived, is denied, to resort to images and pictures, to fasts and festivals, which commemorate the events and vicissitudes of his mortal life. And this the Church of Rome has done. But the Christ of their temples and domestic shrines is no more the Christ of the Scriptures than Aaron's golden calf was the God who brought the Israelites out of Egypt, and is no more suited to instruct the besotted people who use the image as to the true nature of his person and his office that the more ancient instrument of idolatry was suited to convey adequate conceptions of that majestic Being who was thundering out of the thick darkness of the mount. In both cases there is an attempt to worship God by a violation of one of the very plainest of his commandments. The ancient idolaters, however, made no attempt, so far as we know, to expunge the obnoxious precept.

ROME: A RELIGION OF IMAGES

It is, however, less as an object of worship than as an instrument of instruction that we now refer to the use of the image in the Church of Rome. It is their way of setting forth the great truth touching the prominence which is due to the person and grace of Christ in the experience of the believer. The manner in which Paul would begin a missionary work may be seen in Rom. x. 6, 8. The method of popery may be seen in any history of its missions. The results, respectively, of the two methods in exalting national character in knowledge and civilisation are so obvious that the wayfaring man, though a fool, need not err concerning them. The results of the two methods in the improvement of the individual in scriptural knowledge and genuine piety are still more startling, and scarcely need to be referred to.

II. Again, "it is a prevalent notion of truth that the worship of God ought to be beautiful and glorious."

We cannot reflect upon the majesty of our Maker at all without feeling that the worship which becomes such creatures as we are, and which is acceptable to him, must not be mean or low, except so far as these qualities must belong to the creature in comparison with the Creator. This is the dictate even of the light of nature. When we come to examine the Scriptures we find that this instinct, so far from being disallowed, is sanctioned and confirmed. The worship of the Mosaic institute, the gorgeous furniture of the tabernacle, the splendid temple which succeeded it, the brilliant vestments of the priests, the costly incense which ascended in a fragrant cloud from the golden censer, the inner sanctuary, where was the throne of God, attended by the cherubim, concealed by a veil which the high priest alone was allowed to put aside, and he only once in the whole year, all this was designed to impress the ancient people of God with a sense of his awful majesty, and with a conviction of the glory of his worship. But it was only the alphabet, the primary elements, as Paul calls it, of the truth. The scheme of redemption, in its great features, was so different from anything over conceived by the human understanding, so difficult to be received by it, that a new language was necessary, symbols addressed to the senses and the imagination, and kept continually before them, to give the new ideas and anomalous relations a permanent lodgement in the current of human thought. Under the gospel all the forms are changed; the worship of God is still glorious, nay, far more glorious than before, but the outward signs of the glory have been removed. (Compare 2 Corinthians iii with the Epistle to the Hebrews throughout.) Jesus Christ is the spirit of the old letter; the temple, the ark, the mercy-seat, the altar, the priest, the complement of the whole imposing ritual in all its parts and details. There is no more use, no propriety, in such forms and appliances of worship as were tolerated under the law in the infancy and childhood of the church. There is no priest on earth in the literal sense; all are priests, high priests, who have boldness to enter every day and every hour into the holiest of all, through their union with Jesus, the only real priest, de jure or de facto, in the universe. There is no sacrifice, in the literal sense, on earth; all the services and worship of believers are spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ, who offered himself once for all, and by that one offering perfected for ever them that are sanctified. There remaineth no more sacrifice for sin. There is and can be no temple on earth in the literal sense; every believer is the temple of the Holy Ghost, and there are no dead temples now, no consecrated stone, brick, or wood; our houses of worship are "meeting-houses", no more, no less. The true and only temple, in the sense of that which makes God conversable with man and man's worship acceptable to God, is the human nature of our Lord Jesus Christ.

We need not say that in the Church of Rome there is nothing but the old Jewish image of the true glory of divine worship: a temple, a succession of mortal priests, a daily sacrifice, incense and intercession, a ritual imposing to the senses and the imagination, but no access to the mercy-seat of God. "Through him," that is, the Son, "we have access by one Spirit to the Father"; this is the description of true worship, the fellowship enjoyed by all who have been admitted to the glorious liberty of the sons of God. But where are the vestiges of it in the great apostasy? Is God a Father there, or a vindictive Judge, over ready to launch his thunder-bolts against the wretched victims of remorse and terror? Is not the mediation of the Son entirely annihilated? What means the sacrifice of the mass but a denial of the reality and efficacy of the sacrifice of Jesus? the erection of a daily "remembrancer of sin", which can never make the worshipper perfect as pertaining to the conscience, and, therefore, keeps him in the iron bondage of a sense of guilt? And where is the intercession of the Son? Is it not thrust aside by their "doctrines of demons", their teachings concerning angels and the glorified spirits of the saints, accommodated from pagan mythology and rabbinical tradition? And what room is there in this accursed system for the agency of the Spirit? The priesthood, which is the church, has thrust itself between the worshipper and the Holy Ghost, as well as between the worshipper and the Son. It is a mere mechanical process of salvation by sacramental means; the personality of the Spirit is practically denied; the sovereign will of the blasphemous usurper of divine prerogatives called a priest, implied in the "intention", is the only personal element in the business. The miserable wretch who is taught to believe that he is eating his god will have this advantage over the priest who makes the god for him, that his damnation will not be quite so deep.

ROME:ANTICHRIST

We have no space for more illustration. We advise our younger brethren to study this system more and more as anti-Christ. The most subtle and ingenious perversions of the cardinal doctrines of the gospel, made by the cunning of him who was a liar and a murderer from the beginning, constitute the essence, the organic life, of popery, and give rise to all those appalling manifestations of its nature in the history of individuals, families, and nations. Clearly and strikingly will it be seen, by such an investigation, that no man can hate it as it deserves to be hated, unless he loves the doctrines of grace; that the infamy which covers the system as a grinding despotism in the life that now is, is honour and glory compared with the infamy which belongs to it as a cruel and devilish device to crush all the hopes of fallen and agonised humanity for the life that is to come. It is amazing to observe with what remorseless activity and vigilance it meets the sinner at every turn, offering the image for the reality, the shadow for the substance, stones for bread, and a scorpion for an egg. It is Hobbism in world, a vast Leviathan whose will is law, whose frown is death, but it is also semi-Pelagianism, which is worse, sealing men up in everlasting darkness and despair.

THIS IS NOT POLITICS

We are not to be deterred from doing our duty by the cry which we shall doubtless hear from foolish men, that in exposing and denouncing popery we are dabbling in politics. If the insatiable ambition of priests and prelates, and their equally insatiable avarice, have alarmed the jealousy of those who love their country, who are to blame for it? While as American citizens we claim the right to think and speak freely on all subjects connected with our national prosperity, we swear by no party. Doubtless there are many who declaim upon the stump and elsewhere against Rome who do not and cannot hate it, because they have not been converted to God. There are not a few who justify the sarcasm of Mr. Wise; who raise their hands with holy horror at the audacious wickedness which shuts the Bible against man, and yet never disturb the repose of their own Bibles covered with cobwebs and dust. But if men hold the truth in unrighteousness, they must answer for themselves. The duty of the church is plain. It is to set forth the mystery of godliness, and in contrast with it and explanation of it, the mystery of iniquity. "If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained."
The Development of Rome - Antichrist Comes To Light
A careful study of prophecy and world history shows us that Papal Rome grew out of Imperial Rome.
Rev. Kyle Paisley

A careful study of prophecy and world history shows us that Papal Rome grew out of Imperial Rome. In Daniel chapter seven we have the foretelling of the rise of four great world empires.

Each of these great empires is represented by a particular beast.

The First Beast

There is, firstly, a lion, (Daniel 7:4). It is commonly held that this first beast represents Babylonia. Nebuchadnezzar, who was king of this empire is called 'the lion' in Jeremiah 4:7.

The Second Beast

The second beast mentioned is a bear, (Daniel 7:5) The world kingdom which followed the demise of Babylonia was Persia. It is fitting that it is pictured under this symbol, for the Persians were, like the bear, notoriously cruel. One of their tortures was to pull off the skin from men alive, either in pieces or altogether.

The Third Beast

In Daniel 7:6 the third great world empire is pictured by the symbol of a leopard. The leopard represents Greece. The four wings denote the swiftness with which the Grecian empire came to prominence. It took only twelve years for Alexander, its Emperor, to subdue all Asia, from Macedonia to the Ganges and parts of Europe. The four heads denote the four kingdoms into which the empire was divided at the death of Alexander.

The Fourth Beast

In Daniel 7:7 the rise of Imperial Rome is depicted. Rome followed Greece as the fourth great world empire. The 'ten horns' are the ten divisions of the Roman Empire - Italy, France, Spain, Germany, Britain, Sumatria, Parmonia, Asia, Greece and Egype.

In verse 8 another horn rises in the head of the fourth beast. Its characteristics should be noticed:

* It is little.
* It is powerful, for before it 'three of the first horns were plucked up by the roots'.
* It has eyes
* It has a mouth, 'speaking great things'.

Before Imperial Rome was dead there was the emergence of Papal Rome. At its inception it was 'little'. It was unobtrusive and apparently harmless. (In another sense papal Rome is 'little'. It is little with respect to the fact that the territory of the Papacy is small compared to that of other world powers, being only a province within a country). But it soon grew in might as is symbolized in the plucking up of the three horns. See also verse 24 of Daniel 7.

The Papacy subdued three kingdoms -

* Ravenna, the western capital of the Roman Empire, ruled by Emperor Leo who was deposed by Pope Gregory II;
* France, ruled by King Childeric, who was deposed by Pope Zachary;
* The Lombards, who came under the jurisdiction of Pope Leo III.

The 'little horn' of verse 8 is also said to have 'a mouth, speaking great things'. These 'great things' are blasphemies. This is confirmed by verse 25. The more the Papacy developed the more offensive to God it became.

Emerging as she did from Imperial Rome, she assimilated much of the Paganism of that empire.

In Imperial Rome the Emperor was known by the title 'Pontifex Maximus', a title bequeathed by the last of the original Babylonian priests.

From 63 BC up to 375 AD this title continued to be used, until the Emperor Gratian renounced it and the Bishop of Rome took it up. The first Pope to use the title was Pope Damascus I, who reigned from 366-384.

The Pontifax Maximus in ancient Babylon was the representative of the god Janus, the Babylonian Messiah.

By the titles ascribed to and assumed by various popes down through the history of the Roman Catholic Church, we have the fulfilment of Daniel 7:8,25.

Here are some of the 'great words' spoken by the Papacy against the Most High:

* 'Universal Bishop' - This title was first assumed by Pope Boniface III in 606 AD. It was the first official claim to supremacy by any pope. It is also a theft from Jesus Christ. 1 Peter 2:25.
* 'Our Most Holy Lord' - Council of Trent, 1545. Christ alone is Lord. Revelation 17:14.
* 'Most Holy and Blessed Father, Head of the Church, Ruler of the World, to whom the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven are committed, whom the angels in Heaven revere, and the gates of Hell fear, and all the world adores' - used of Pope Innocent X at his 'enthronement', 1644. This is another usurpation - Matthew 23:9; Colossians 1:18; Revelation 1:18; Revelation 4:10.
* 'Divine Monarch, Supreme Emperor, King of kings' - Stolen from Christ. Revelation 17:14.
* 'Head of the Church' - Stolen from Christ. Colossians 1:18.
* 'The Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world' - stolen from Christ, John 1:29.
* 'The Chief Shepherd' - Stolen from Christ, 1 Peter 5:24.
* 'Universal Priest' - Stolen from Christ, Hebrews 2:17.

When Pope Pius IX was Archbishop of Venice, he stated: 'The pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, but he is Jesus Christ Himself, hidden under the veil of the flesh. Does the pope speak? It is Jesus Christ who speaks. Does the pope accord a favour or pronounce an anathema? It is Jesus Christ who accords the favour or pronounces that anathema. So that when the pope speaks we have no business to examine.'

* 'Vicar of Christ' - Prior to the twelfth century the popes were styled 'Vicars of Peter'. Since then they have called themselves 'Vicars of Jesus Christ'. It should be noted that the word 'vicar' means 'substitute', ie, one who takes the place of another. The Holy Spirit is the only 'vicar' of Christ. Read John 14:16,17; and 16:7,13,14.

Contrast the above claims with the following statement made by Pope Gregory the Great at the end of the sixth century. He said: 'I confidently say that whoever calls himself, or desires to be called, the Universal Priest, is the forerunner of Antichrist in his pride, because by exalting himself he places himself above others. Nor is his pride different from that which leads Antichrist to his error, because as that wicked one wishes to be thought a god above all men, so he who desires to be called the sole priest exalts himself above all other priests.'

As well as claims to spiritual supremacy, claims to temporal supremacy have also been made by the Papacy throughout its long history.

One of the most significant events in history was the removal of the Emperor's seat of authority from Rome to Constantinople. When that happened, the Bishop of Rome began to rule Western Europe from the old throne of the Caesars. However, it was not until the year 800 that temporal supremacy was first openly affirmed by the Papacy. That year Emperor Charlemagne accepted the crown as monarch of western Euorpe from the hands of Pope Leo III.

In the decree of Pope Boniface VIII, issued in 1303, temporal supremacy was formally asserted in the following words: 'In his power there are two swords, the spiritual and the temporal... Temporal authority must be subject to spiritual power.' This decree is part of Canon Law in the Roman Church.

In England especially the Church of Rome sought to dominate. From 1000-1300 several attempts were made to attain supremacy. The Anglo-Saxon kings always prided themselves in their independence, but King John sacrificed that independence in order to suppress the liberties of his subjects by the Pope's means.

A break with Rome came during the reign of Henry VIII, but it was more for personal reasons than doctrinal reasons. Henry was furious with the Pope's refusal to grant him a divorce from Catherine of Aragon.

In 1553 Papal authority was restored in England during the reign of Mary Tudor.

Pope Pius V (1566-1572) also tried to enforce his authority in England. In his famous Bull published against Queen Elizabeth it is stated 'He that reigneth on high made him alone (the pope) prince over all people and all kingdoms, to pluck up, destroy, scatter, consume, plant and build.'

In 1588 Pope Sixtus gave his benediction to the spanish Armada as it sailed for England with its equipment of priests and instruments of torture designed for 'heretics'.

During her development the Church of Rome became more confirmed in the arrogancy of her claims. The famous Englishman, Cardinal Manning, said: 'The right of deposing kings is inherent in the supreme sovereignty which the popes, as viceregents of Christ, exercise over all Christian nations.....The royal supremacy has perished, and the supremacy of the vicar of Jesus Christ re-enters England full of life.'

The Encyclical of Pope Pius X, issued in 1864, asserted:

* the right to require the State not to leave any man free to profess his own religion;
* the right to employ force;
* the right to claim dominion in temporal things;
* the right to have the entire control of public schools;
* the right to hold princes and kings in subjection;
* the right to treat all marriages as invalid which are not solemnized according to the forms of the Council of Trent;
* the right to prevent the State granting to immigrants the public exercise of their own worship;
* the right to require the State not to permit free expression of opinion;

At the turn of the nineteenth century Dr.Mananus de Luca, SJ, Professor of Canon Law at the Gregorian University at Rome, said: 'The' Catholic Church has the right and the duty to kill heretics, because it is by fire and sword that heresy can be extirpated.....The only recourse is to put them to death. Repentance cannot be allowed to save civil criminals.'

The beginnings of the Papacy were small, but it was not long until the 'little horn' began to assert itself, and it has continued to do so down through the centuries.

The Words of Christ

As Rome developed her thirst for power became greater. it is important to remember here the words of Christ. He said: 'My kingdom is not of this world....else would my servants fight'.

The Roman Church has proved in her history that she is not part of that Kingdom.
The Worship of Saints
The especial characteristic of the Romish Church is image worship, and this charge it virtually acknowledges by excluding the second Commandment.
Rev. George Croly, LL.D.

[Dr. George Croly was a great English Protestant stalwart of the nineteenth century. He was Rector of the United Parishes of St. Stephen Walbrook and St. Herbert. The following is an extract from his sermon entitled "Papal Rome – The Principles and Practices of Rome alike condemned by the Gospel", preached in 1848. Though specifically highlighting the error of saint-worship, the extract also exposes the intrinsic falsehood of the whole vast Romanist system. I have modernised the punctuation and spelling and added a few explanatory footnotes, but left the original text intact. – A.N.]

To whatever being beyond the grave man offers worship, that being is, to the worshipper, a god. For to hear prayer at all times and places, and to answer it, obviously implies universal presence and unlimited power. Rome acknowledges hundreds of saints, which thus to her are gods.

Against thus degrading the supremacy of the Eternal she takes refuge in the doctrine of subordinate gods. But there can be no subordinate god. The doctrine itself is a contradiction in terms: there can be no ranks in perfection. Nature in its evidence of One Creator, Scripture in its declaration: "The Lord thy God is one God", and reason in its consciousness of the immeasurable distance between a Self-existent and a created Being, alike confute the most enormous of all errors. If the saints are gods, the tenet involves the extravagant absurdity that the created can be uncreate, the limited infinite, and that the born in time has existed from eternity.

The Virgin stands at the head of the Popish calendar, and Rome loads her with laborious titles of government and glory. She is declared the great protectress of the believing world, the giver of salvation and the "Queen of Heaven". A separate worship has been formed for her, litanies have been invented in her honour, filled with rapturous repetitions of her name, and the Roman temples resound with a perpetual 'Ave Maria', which is an invocation, not a prayer.

Yet nothing can be more evident than that Mary was not permitted to exercise the slightest interference in the mission of our Lord; that He refused to work His first miracle at her bidding, in the presence of His disciples; that we have no intimation of His ever having wrought any one of His multitude of miracles at her bidding; that, while the Apostles, and even the seventy, wrought miracles in their mission, Mary wrought none; and that, at His death, instead of bequeathing the Church to her sceptre, He bequeathed herself as a husbandless and helpless woman to the care of His disciple, who thenceforth "took her to his own home". Even in His resurrection He appeared first to another, whom He sent to give the glad tidings to His disciples. After the Pentecost the name of Mary is heard no more. Can it be doubted that He, to whom the future was the present, thus contemplated the "falling away" and thus fortified the Christian against giving to a mortal the worship due only to God?

I must now limit myself to a rapid glance at the arguments by which, in our day, the astonishing impiety of laying once more the yoke of Popery on the neck of England has attempted a palliation.

It has been asked: Would God have tolerated the spiritual blindness of so many ages and of so many millions of men? The sufficient answer is that He tolerated heathenism through more ages and throughout a world. What God ought to do is beyond the limit of human understanding; what He has done is for its lesson.
The savage slays his enemy, but he does not torture his neighbour for refusing to bow down to the same idol as himself.

It has been asked: Is not any religion better than none? The answer is that a bad religion is worse than none; that truth will have more power on the mind that is blackened over with prejudice; and that nature is a better teacher than superstition. The savage slays his enemy, but he does not torture his neighbour for refusing to bow down to the same idol as himself. The Arab plunders, but he has no confessor to teach him perfidy: he keeps his oath, and the man who has shared his bread and salt is safe, whether he prays towards Mecca of Jerusalem. Ignorance is obviously better than the fierce fallacy which at once enfeebles the mind, inflames the passions, and plants an inveterate hostility to truth in the heart of man. To teach error is not to teach at all.

It has been asked: Must not Popery, by acknowledging the principles of Christianity, be, at least, good in part? The answer is that the acknowledgement of those principles was necessary to their perversion. To delude is impossible but1 under the semblance of sincerity. By the constitution of the human mind, wherever truth and falsehood are thus compounded, the falsehood inevitably overwhelms the truth, because the very attempt to combine them implies the worldliness which leads to error. We might as well yoke the living to the dead in the expectation of giving life to the corpse: the corpse corrupts the living. We must have truth alone or falsehood alone. How can a man believe in God and yet worship an idol?

The first half of the Creed of Pius VI, the standard of Popery, is the Nicene Creed; the next half contradicts its whole substance. There is no good in Popery.
...and that all heresies condemned by the Church [of Rome] are to be anathematized; that out of the [Roman] Catholic faith there is no salvation!

In the year 1563 the Council of Trent decreed that all persons promoted to Benefices with care of souls should make a public confession of their faith, and in the following year Pius IV issued the formulary which is since called his Creed and which is acknowledged as the standard of Romish doctrine. As the subject is familiar to all readers of Church history, I shall merely glance at the nature of this memorable document, which is generally divided into separate Articles. The first three contain the Nicene Creed; the remainder belong especially2 to Rome. Those Articles pronounce the Church [of Rome] to be the only judge of the sense of the Scripture; appoint seven sacraments; declare that in the mass there is offered a true propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead; that the whole body and blood, soul and divinity of our Lord are offered in the Eucharist, and that the sacrifice is offered in either kind alone; that there is a purgatory and that souls therein are helped by the suffrages of the faithful; that the saints are to be invocated3, that they pray for us to God, and that their relics are to be held in veneration; that the images of Christ, the Virgin and saints are to be retained, and to be held in "due veneration"; that the power of indulgences was given by God to the Church; and that the use of them is most wholesome; that the Church of Rome is the mother and mistress of all churches; that all things declared by the Councils, and especially the Council of Trent, are to be undoubtingly received, and that all heresies condemned by the Church [of Rome] are to be anathematized; that out of4 the [Roman] Catholic faith there is no salvation!

In judging the inveterate nature of Popery we are to remember that this Creed was not formed in a barbarous age, but in the most active period of the recovered human mind; that it was not made in the brute arrogance of a despotic time, but with the new power of European opinion compelling it to be cautious at every step; and that the Council of Trent, combining all the learning of Popery and all the experience of Papal peril, sat for nearly eighteen years. If the history of that ominous and evil Council exhibits in its doubts and altercations an irresistible answer to the outrageous claim of infallibility, nothing can be more distinct and decisive than its conclusions. It has, however, given to Protestantism the eminent advantage of knowing the whole plea5 of Popery. We are no longer to be sent back to the perplexities of obsolete tradition, to the helpless conjectures of the Fathers, or to the supersubtle disguises of Romish doctrine by Rome itself. The Council of Trent is the criminal in court; the Creed of Pope Pius is his confession; and we have thenceforth only to judge of6 the guilt of Rome by the recognised laws of the understanding.

It has also been asked: Are we not indebted to Popery for preserving, at least, the rudiments of Christianity through the Dark Ages? The answer is that Popery itself constituted the Dark Ages.

The theory of this debt has been among the fanciful inventions of a class of writers who, in the pursuit of romantic novelty, have lately laboured to discover the services of7 Rome. But it might be almost conceived that those writers had never read the annals of early Christianity. The whole Roman Empire in Europe was Christian before the coming of Antichrist. Even the chief tribes of the Barbarian invaders were Christian – some even before their invasion. In the fourth century the Gothic nation had adopted the creed of their great missionary Ulphilas, and in the progress of the fifth and sixth centuries Christianity had spread itself among the conquerors in the most widely distant Provinces of the Western Empire – the Burgundians in Gaul, the Suevi in Spain, the Vandals in Africa and the Ostrogoths in Pannonia.
The Reformation was scarcely more a blaze of religious light than it was a burst of intellectual triumph.

What conceivable right have we to presume that the divine and habitual power of Christianity to enlarge the faculties and purify the morals of mankind would not have wrought their natural effect on those fresh and bold minds from whose energy all the liberties of Europe have eternally sprung? But the true proof of the pressure of Rome is the saliency of the human mind when its pressure began to be removed. The Reformation was scarcely more a blaze of religious light than it was a burst of intellectual triumph. Science was emancipated by the same blow which smote Superstition. The tyranny of mind and the tyranny of conscience died together.

It is true that the great Ruler of all, in His mercy, has never suffered unmixed evil to overwhelm mankind; that out of the deepest humiliation of the earth He extracts good; and that He created, as of old, in the pomp and superstition, the encouragement of the arts. Thus, He creates the struggles of war, the sustenance of the bolder qualities of our nature; and thus, even in the sufferings inflicted by His own hand in the famine and the pestilence, He elicits the birth of human resource and the new activity of human preservation.

It is true that cities arose, and men reasoned, and that human energy was not suffered to lose wholly its spring, even under the pressure of Rome. But how little had man been profited by the thousand years of its supremacy! How vast a blank was left in the life of the world! How empty were the drudgeries of the school-men8! How wearied, bewildered and exhausted was the genius of Europe in wandering through the Egyptian darkness of the Middle Ages! And how irresistible an evidence of the evil was given in the sudden contrast of good9; in the power with which the European mind sprang on its feet at the moment when its old chains were breaking; in the scarcely less than miraculous ardour and intellectual soaring with which it achieved the magnificent discoveries of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries – those bright mountain-tops, emerging from the flood of death to tell us then, and tell us still, how glorious an intellectual world lies yet to be developed when the waters of darkness shall be finally drained away10!

The true view of Popery is not that of the preserver of ancient literature or the parent of modern science, but the perverter of the one and the persecutor of the other11. It could not prevent the light of Heaven descending on man, but it suffered the light to descend only through the bars of a dungeon, which at once restricted the powers of human movement and shut out the excitement, the health and the grandeur of nature.
Enquiry into the Scriptures is the foundation of faith in the mind of the Christian; but Popery commands an implicit belief, not in the Scriptures, but in its Church, and even in that Church only as speaking by the Council of Trent.

[…] The love and fear of God are the motives of the Gospel to obedience; but Popery assigns the love to the Virgin Mary and the saints as the irresistible agents12 of man with God, while it nullifies all fear by its provisions of indulgences, masses and prayers for the dead.

Enquiry into the Scriptures is the foundation of faith in the mind of the Christian; but Popery commands an implicit belief, not in the Scriptures, but in its Church, and even in that Church only as speaking13 by the Council of Trent14.

[…] Of all the thrones of Europe, the Popedom has been the most exposed to casualty. For three hundred years, from the thirteenth century, its existence was a convulsion. Every clash of arms from the extremity of Europe found an echo in the Vatican. Every civil tempest of France, or Germany, sent a surge to dash against the walls of Rome. Yet, except by the Reformation, the influence of Popery was never retrenched in Europe.

[…] The especial15 characteristic of the Romish Church is image worship, and this charge it virtually acknowledges by excluding the second Commandment. Popery attempts a subterfuge16 under the words "due veneration"; but who is to be the judge of "due veneration", or who ever saw the mass solemnised without asking himself: Could worship go further? The jewelled crowns and tissued robes of the images, the golden shrines and votive tablets, the lifted hands, the adoring eyes, the hymns, the chorus of prayer! What mean they? If the Deity Himself descended on the altar, could man offer him more significant homage?

The divine commandment excludes all worship of an image, all "due veneration" – even the presence of an image. "Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image."

The ground of the commandment is perfectly intelligible. An image must be a false representation of God; it gives a false familiarity with the divine presence; it makes the Infinite local and gives the Omnipotent to the hands of a man. What work of canvass or stone can possibly realise17 even to the mind the Eternal? And the conception becomes lower still when miracles, tears and smiles of divine benefice, and the melancholy artifices of the Breviary, are attributed to the picture and the statue.

It is in this, and not in their own shallow subtleties and cobweb contrivances, that the statesmen of the world should look for the sweeping calamities and fiery cataclysms which, from age to age, have tossed the political soil of Europe like a raging sea. The same sovereign wrath which tore Israel up by the roots and flung it out, trunk and branch, to be shattered by the world – the same avenging justice which brought the hunter of the desert round the Imperial wild beast of Rome and smote him in his lair – still reigns, and judges, and punishes. Shall there be no lesson to us, in the ruthless havoc and wild heartrendings of the fairest countries of Europe during bigoted centuries? We ourselves are now18 beginning to feel the work of this wearied long-suffering; we know now, by bitter experience, the writhings and agonies of rebellion, like a wounded snake, preserving a strange vitality under all its bruises, and dangerous to the last. Yet when was Ireland without an infliction, and when was not all the remedial power of England hopeless to staunch her issue of blood – that disease of centuries19, for which she could have but one Healer, but to Whom she would not come.

1 except

2 specially, exclusively

3 invoked

4 outside

5 doctrinal system

6 in the matter of

7 find something positive to say about

8 teachers, educators

9 i.e., the Reformation

10 cf. the discoveries of the following 150 years, from the Industrial Revolution to the microchip

11 cf. the trial of Galileo

12 mediators between

13 interpreted

14 Creed of Pope Pius IV, Article V: "our Holy Mother the Church […] to which it belongs to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the Scriptures". Thus the Council of Trent fastens the padlock on the Scriptures at the moment when it hangs the chain on the human mind. Enquiry into the Scriptures is thenceforth useless to the whole community of Romanism.

15 special

16 The Papist subterfuge consists in saying that the Ten Commandments are retained in the Romish Bible and the larger Romish Catechism, but the catechisms in Italy (Bellarmine's, etc.) and Ireland reject it.

17 reveal

18 i.e., in 1848, the year of rebellions throughout Europe, including Ireland

19 Popery
The Scarlet Woman or The Revival of Romanism
Dr. Haldeman was one of the great fundamental prophets of the early 20th century.
I.M. Haldeman, D.D.

[Editor's note:- Dr. Haldeman was one of the great fundamental prophets of the early 20th century. This sermon, which we reprint here, was preached in 1910 in the First Baptist Church, New York City, and indicates his vision and understanding of the anti-Christianity of the Church of Rome. His comment on world events of the time makes it unique and gives us an insight into Biblical Christian thinking in the early years of the last decade of the Millennium. We believe that such preaching against Popery needs to be resurrected and a new era of opportunity created to alert those who have been almost overcome by the false opinions of Rome. When these sermons were first published, the preacher said: "I am convinced that the 'signs of the times' call for a reading and study in this hour as never before. Heaven, and earth, and hell - the professing church, the nations, and, now and then, the clanging of nature's forces, bid us realise that we are on the threshold where the shifting of events, at any moment, may usher in that vast and solemn process, whose terminus ad quem is the Coming and Kingdom of the Son of God." - If this was so at the beginning of our century, how much more now as it ends!]

"So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness. And I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.

"And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones, and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:

"And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

"And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her I wondered with great admiration. [...] And the woman which thou sawest is that great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth." (Revelation 17: 1-6, 18.)

A woman in scripture is a symbol of the church.

The church, under the figure of a woman, is first espoused, and then presented, as a chaste virgin to Christ. "I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ." (II Corinthians 11:12.)

What is written to the Corinthian church is written to "all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours". (I Corinthians 1:2.)

The announcement of the virginal character of the Corinthian church in its standing before God is an affirmation as to the standing of the church in "every place", necessarily in all time, and, therefore, of the church everywhere, and in our time.

It is a symbol of the church universal.

The woman is the church.

The church is also symbolised by a city. "And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.

"And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God." (Revelation 21:9, 10.)

The Lamb is our Lord Jesus Christ.

The bride, the Lamb's wife, when espoused and presented to Him, must have been a chaste virgin. The chaste virgin espoused and presented by Paul to Christ, is the church. As the holy city is the bride of Christ, His wife and, in the nature of the case, must have been espoused and presented to Him as a chaste Virgin, and the chaste virgin when so espoused and presented becomes a bride, a wife, then the holy city, the bride, the Lamb's wife, the wife of Christ, is a symbol of the church. A chaste virgin, a bride, a wife, is a woman; and as the city is the symbol of a wife, then the city is the symbol of a woman. As the woman is the symbol of the church, and the church is symbolised by a city, then the woman is, also, a symbol of the city. The woman is a symbol of the city, the city is a symbol of the woman, and both the woman and the city are symbols of the church; and thus, whether it be a woman or a city, the one identifies the other.

But it is evident that while the woman is exclusively a symbol, and not a real woman, the city is both a symbol and an actual city.

The city is a symbol.

The city is the symbol of a woman, and as a woman is an organised body, and is the symbol of the church, then the city is the symbol of the church as an organised body, a polity, a system.

The city is actual.

A city consists of people and the place in which people dwell.

The church as an organised body, a polity, a system, consists of people and, as such, must have a place to dwell. When, therefore, the Apostle John in vision sees the holy city as the bride, the Lamb's wife, he sees that city both as the people and the place in which they dwell; and the name of the city includes them both. Just as New York signifies the people and the city in which they dwell, so the holy city, the New Jerusalem, signifies the church as a polity, a system, a body of people, and the real and actual place, the real and actual city in which, as real and actual people, they shall dwell, and from whence they shall shine forth as the glorified bride of Christ, the triumphant wife of the Lamb.

In the scripture quoted at the head of this article we have the picture of a woman, and this woman declared to be a city.

What is true of the woman who is the Lamb's bride, who is also a city, is equally true of this woman who is called a city.

The woman is exclusively a symbol, she is not a real woman; the city is both symbolic and actual.

By the preceding evidence of symbolry this scarlet-clad woman and the city, where of necessity she must be centralised, where she must dwell, and from which she must be manifested in her power, both represent a church.

But this woman and this city stand in terrific contrast to the woman and city which set forth the church of Christ.

They contrast and contradict each other. The church is represented by a chaste virgin.

This woman is a bedizened harlot, and is called in plain speech, "the whore."

The church is espoused to one husband. This woman holds promiscuous commerce with the kings of the earth.

The church is the mystery of godliness. This woman is "MYSTERY, BABYLON". The church is called "the pillar and ground of the truth."

This woman is called "Babylon", signifies "confusion", and recalls an unfinished tower. The church offers the cup of salvation and stands for holiness.

This woman holds in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and filthiness.

The church is the mother of the saints. This woman is "THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS".

The church is the bride of Christ.

This woman, by the law of symbolry, is a professed church of Christ, and therefore a would-be bride of Christ; but, as she is a harlot, she cannot be the true bride of Christ, she cannot be the true church of Christ. If she is not the true church of Christ but a corrupt and corrupting harlot, then she is a false and corrupt church professing the name of Christ.

The identity of this false and corrupt church is not far to seek.

She is called a city, a city that "reigneth over the "kings of the earth".

A city that reigns over the kings of the earth is a universal city. A universal city is a catholic city. As this universal-catholic city is, also, symbolically, a woman, and this woman a professed church, then this woman is a universal, a catholic church.

This universal, this catholic church, is represented as exceedingly rich in gold, in precious stones and pearls.

The distinctive colour of the woman is scarlet.

She has not only committed fornication herself, but has made the inhabitants drunk with the wine of her fornication. Fornication in the book of the Revelation signifies idolatry, and idolatry is - image worship.

This woman, therefore, is a church whose official and distinguishing colour is scarlet. Just as our schools, colleges and universities, have their colours, so this church has hers - and her colour is scarlet.

This woman is a church which practises, and has taught the people of the earth to practise, idolatry, to engage in the worship of images.

This scarlet-clad woman is drunken with the blood of saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.

It is the picture of a universal, a catholic, church, in the name of Christ, causing the martyrdom of the followers of Christ, and revelling in their blood till she has become frenzied and drunken by it. This woman not only represents a church, but the city in which it dwells and is capitalised, the centre and manifestation of its glory. Just as much as the New Jerusalem represents not only the church, but the central place where she is to reveal her glory, so this woman represents the actual city of her own abode.

The reality and identity of the city are set before us with indelible marks. The Apostle John says it is "that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth".

There was but one city in John's day which reigned over the kings of the earth, and that city was ROME.

That the city was Rome is corroborated topographically. We are told that the woman is seated on seven mountains.

"The seven heads [that is, of the beast] are seven mountains. And there are [they are] seven kings." (Revelation. 17:9, 10.)

The heads are symbolic, but they set forth two real things - mountains and kings. If the kings are real, equally so are the mountains; the mountains indicate the place where the kings rule. The location of the kings, the location of the woman and, therefore, the location of the city, was on seven mountains.

The Rome of Saint John's day, the Rome of our day, is seated on seven hills, and these hills are definitely called mountains; but the city is known in the pages of every history as "the seven-hilled city".

The city, then, which the woman symbolises is Rome; and as the woman is also the symbol of a church, then you have a church in the city of Rome, a church which, like the city, is universal and catholic in its rule. A church in the city of Rome is a Roman church; a catholic church in Rome is, therefore, a Roman Catholic Church. And here you have the riddle read, the symbol told, the identity disclosed. The woman foreseen and described by the Spirit of God in John is - THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH.

As the name of the woman is Babylon, and the woman is, symbolically, the city, the name of the city must, also, be Babylon; but, as the city is actual Rome and not the real city of Babylon, then the name Babylon is given to it, as to the woman, simply to set forth the moral character of both.

In Revelation 11:18, Jerusalem is called Sodom and Egypt, so called to mark its moral and spiritual degeneration. This woman and city likewise go by the name of Babylon to set forth the turpitude, the uncleanness and the abomination, both of the city and the system.

The Roman Catholic Church is called Babylon from God's point of view; from God's point of view it is the mystery of abomination.

Go to that city of the seven hills, where every hill is called a "mount", and you will find that from thence the Roman Catholic Church rules over nations, peoples, kindreds and tongues - a universal rule, counting its subjects by the hundreds of millions, and is thus in deed and in very fact a universal church, an actual kingdom over which one man as Pope is head supreme.

Take up history, and you will find that it has reigned over the kings of the earth and made them its willing slaves, holding over them the terrors of excommunication, paralysing the hands that held the sceptre, and forcing the onetime proudest emperor of the world to stand shivering on a winter's day in his penitential shirt at a papal palace door, while the exalted pontiff within turned indifferently away. Examine, and you will find that this church today is rich in gold, in silver, and in precious stones, its buildings storehouses of the world's most coveted wealth.

Visit the "treasuries", fittingly so called, in her great cathedrals, Notre Dame at Paris, the statue-pointed cathedral at Milan, Saint Peter's at Rome, and you will find gold, silver, pearls, and all precious things. You will find them in mitres and crosiers, in chasubles and patens, in cups, in crystals and vestments, as gifts from kings, from emperors and queens; offerings from the richest of earth, wealth enough to make even kings envy.

Look at this church filled with gold, with silver and precious stones, and you will find that its official colour is scarlet, scarlet in the hat of its cardinals, scarlet in the robes of its pontiff and priests, scarlet everywhere - a scarlet-coloured church.

Go into its wonderful buildings, some of them monuments of the mightiest architectural genius of the world; visit them, and you will find them full of images, images of the virgin mother, images of the saints.

Stand inside Saint Peter's on a festal day. The vast building sweeps upward through mighty pillar and colossal arch to the sublime, impending dome. On every side are chapels, in themselves monster buildings, vast churches. There is the exalted altar, the countless lights, the smoking incense, the chanting choirs, the scarlet-robed priests, the voice of intonation, prayer and confession, the echoing ora pro nobis, and everywhere kneeling devotees, bowing down to marble images, doing penance and lifting up petitions before their lifeless faces. There are churches specially devoted to the worship of the virgin; her images are covered with gold and silver tributes. In one church the image is piled about with crutches and almost hidden under the offerings of those who believe themselves to have been healed or blessed by her interposition and intercession. Before that stony figure, men and women and little children kneel in rapt adoration.

It is idolatry - pure and simple.

Cast your eyes over the past centuries and you will come upon an era when the rule of this church was so supreme; when she so clutched the throat of the nations with her almost omnipotent hand; so stifled all learning and spiritual knowledge, that by common consent that age has been called the dark age, the midnight of the world's moral, intellectual and spiritual life - so dark and cruel was this time, so full of idolatry, that the Arab, as he swept a victor into Europe, paused at the doors of Catholic churches, then turned and fled as though he were in that very temple of heathen idolatry from which his religion bade him to flee. And it is of this time and this Arab that Mrs. Browning sings when she says that knowledge was at last "thrust into the eye of Europe upon the point of a Paynim's spear".

Read history, not the history written by one author, but by all, and in their pages you will learn how men and women were led into torture chambers or buried in dismal dungeons. You will read how beautiful women were stripped before black masked judges gloating over unprotected shame, and were led away to racks and stretched till their delicate limbs were snapped and their tender flesh torn into shreds. You will read how men and women were broken on the wheel, or flayed alive, their eyes put out, their tongues plucked forth by the roots, their feet placed in boots filled with boiling oil, bags thrust down their throats and then filled with water till they agonised with slow and calculated strangulation, legs placed between boards and the boards driven together by wedges till the bones were crushed little by little to a pulp, nails wrenched from the fingers, bodies sawn asunder as you might saw a log in two, members of the body cut off one at a time, now a hand, then an arm, first one leg, then another, till the victim was a mere quivering, though still living, trunk; men and women taken to the stake and burned alive, the wood dampened, or green wood used, that the fire might burn slowly and the agony and torture of the victim be lengthened. Try and count, if you can, the men and women driven from their homes, their houses burned, their property confiscated, and themselves hunted on the mountains and pursued through the valleys like beasts of prey.

Look at the blood flowing like water from the martyred bodies of men and women, whose only crime was that they loved the Lord Jesus Christ, believed in His finished redemption on the Cross, refused to buy their salvation by penance or good works, rejected the intercession of a human priest, or a woman, no matter how good, claimed the Lord Jesus Christ as their sin-bearer and Saviour at the right hand of the Father, owned Him their only high-priest and intercessor and would not, even at the price of their own life, deny Him who died for them and rose again. And remember, while you read, that these martyrs were led to agony and to death by the authority and express command of the Roman Catholic Church; a church that did all this in the name of that most fiendish of all inventions, the "Holy Inquisition"; a church whose Pope at so late a date as the massacre of Saint Bartholomew's caused a special celebration to be sung in all the churches as a thanksgiving to God that the enemies of Romanism had been thus cruelly and cowardly slain, stabbed in their beds, thrown from the windows of upper stories into stone courts below, or stricken from behind as they walked in the streets; a massacre so horrible, so revolting in all its details, that, even at this hour, when you pass by the gilded gates in front of the Louvre at Paris, it is impossible not to recall the picture of the piled up bodies of the murdered Huguenots flung in the gutter there and weltering in their own blood; it is impossible not to lift the eyes, involuntarily, and look at that Catholic church of Auxerrois just across the way, from whose tower the tocsin, which was to give the signal for the awful night of blood, sounded forth its brazen knell of doom. Bring all this to mind as you read, and you will recognise the perfect accuracy of the Spirit's description when he says that this scarlet-clad, this universal, this catholic church of Rome was drunken with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.

In the vision the woman is seen to be seated upon a seven headed, ten-horned, scarlet-coloured beast. This scarlet-coloured beast is identical with the fourth beast of Daniel's vision. Daniel says: "After this I saw in the night visions, and, behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth; it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it; and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns."

An angel explains the vision to Daniel: "Thus he said, the fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces. And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise." (Daniel 7:23, 24.)



The first three beasts are identical with the three kinds of metal forming part of the image which Nebuchadnezzar saw in a dream and which Daniel by the wisdom of God interpreted, as recorded in the second chapter of the prophecy that bears his name. In that dream the image had a head of gold, breast and arms of silver, and belly and thighs of brass. The golden head, Daniel tells us, represents the Babylonian kingdom. "Thou art," says Daniel, "this head of gold." As the first beast in the vision which Daniel records in the seventh chapter is, also, the first kingdom, and is a lion, then the golden head and the lion are the equivalent symbols of the first kingdom.

The second beast is a bear, and is equivalent to the second kingdom represented by the silver breast and arms of the image. This second kingdom comes in after Babylon and, necessarily, overcomes it, takes it. This kingdom is identified for us in the fifth chapter of Daniel's prophecy, as it is written:

"And Darius the Median took the kingdom" (that is, the kingdom of Babylon). (Daniel 5:31.)

The second beast as thus identified is the Medo-Persian kingdom.

The third beast is a winged leopard and is equivalent to the third kingdom represented in the image by the belly and thighs of brass. This brazen-leopard kingdom, in the order of succession, is the kingdom which overcomes the second, or Medo-Persian kingdom.

Daniel gives us the name of that third kingdom. He has a vision in which he sees a ram standing by a river and then pushing its way westward till a rough he-goat from the west rushes upon him with great fury, overcomes him, and tramples him with his feet. Daniel is perplexed as to the meaning of the vision till an angel appears and gives the interpretation: "And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the appointed time the end shall be. The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia." And the rough goat is the king of Grecia." (Daniel 8:19-21.)

The first three beasts then are identified by the Word of God.

They are: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece.

The fourth beast is the fourth kingdom and is represented in the image by the legs of iron. The iron in the image is matched by the iron in the teeth of the beast: it had great iron teeth.

Iron then is the symbol and character of the fourth beast kingdom.

What great world kingdom is symbolised by iron, is known as the iron kingdom ?

All history answers, every student of history knows, the veriest tyro at school knows, every lip is ready to speak the name - it is ROME.

It is of Rome and Rome alone that iron is used as the symbol - we speak of the iron legions of Rome.

But it is not necessary to go to history to identify the fourth beast, to find the name of the fourth kingdom. The New Testament answers the question and gives the affirmation. The New Testament tells us that Rome was the wide ruling world power in the day when Christ was born. It was, under God, by the edict of a Roman Caesar that the mother of Christ came to Bethlehem, where he was to be born in fulfilment of Holy Scripture.

The fourth kingdom then is Rome; and this Rome included all the territory that once comprised Babylon, Medo-Persia and Greece. Rome was the legatee and heir of the three first kingdoms, and thus by right of succession is, as foretold, the fourth kingdom as it is the symbolic fourth beast.

This fourth beast is identical with the beast of John's vision, the scarlet-coloured beast that marries the Babylonian woman.

This scarlet-coloured beast is a composite symbol. In it are the elements of a leopard, a bear and a lion.

"And the beast which I saw (the beast described in the l7th chapter) was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion." (Revelation 13:2.)

The leopard has been seen to be the third beast, and, therefore, the third kingdom; and has been shown by Daniel in the eighth chapter of his prophecy to be one with the he-goat which overcame the ram, in other words the kingdom of Greece.

The bear has been identified and named, both by symbol and by Darnel's actual statement, as the Medo-Persian kingdom.

The lion is the first symbolic beast in Daniel's vision, is equivalent to the golden head of the image, and is Babylon.

The fact that the three beasts, the lion, the bear, and the leopard, are seen comprised in one beast, is the symbolic, but clear statement that the beast of John's vision is a fourth beast, including the three that preceded it. As Daniel's fourth beast is the symbol of Rome and includes the three preceding kingdoms, Babylon, Medo-Persia and Greece, then John's beast and the beast of Daniel are identical, and both agree in the one testimony that this is Rome.

As the woman who sits upon the beast has been not only symbolically, but topographically identified as Rome, the fact that the very beast upon which she sits is civil and govern mental Rome, becomes the repeated and doubly corroborative demonstration that the city and system of which the woman is a symbol - is Rome.

There is further identification of the two beasts in the fact that each, the beast of Daniel and the beast of John, has ten horns. The ten horns in Daniel's vision are ten kings, so declared by the angel. The ten horns in John's vision are, likewise by an angel, declared to be ten kings.

THIS REVIVAL HAS ALREADY BEGUN.

It began in the hour when the Protestant Reformation was at its zenith. Protestantism rose up, smote Catholicism and drove it from Germany headlong to the Mediterranean. It seemed as though it were about to be flung as with a millstone about its neck into the depths of the sea, when, suddenly it halted, stood still, recovered its strength, shook itself free from the hands of its assailants and began steadily to return to the lands from whence it had been so fiercely expelled.

Nothing is more impressive than the recovery of Romanism from what seemed to be its death-blow. It reads on the page of history like a veritable resurrection of the dead.

And this resurrection has been followed by an immense and ever increasing vitality, by a propaganda that extends to every kingdom, nation and tongue. Austria is Catholic to the core. Germany is filled with devotees of the church, and her supporters may be counted by the millions. The progress in Protestant England is astounding. A year ago all London poured into the streets to see for the first time since the Reformation the triumphant march of a Roman Catholic procession extending for miles, while thousands on either side of the immense column bowed the knee in adoration as the sacred symbols of the church were held aloft. Recently, in this same London, there has been dedicated with imposing ceremonies a stupendous and costly cathedral. Everywhere throughout England the Romish priest is a power, the chapels and churches are filled to overflowing; daily, converts from the Church of England go over to the Church of Rome, and that by easy steps, as though the English church itself had become a half-way house. The non-conformist oath once administered to English kings on the day of coronation has been repealed. The official head of English Protestantism has ceased to protest. Enthusiastic Romanists consider the day not far distant when England will return officially to the faith and be received by Rome as a long wandering, but sincerely repentant and beloved daughter of the church.

In this country Romanism is advancing with giant strides. A little over one hundred years ago there were only 33 priests and less than 50,000 Catholics, scarcely a decent church building, one college and no schools. Today there are nearly twenty millions of communicants, one cardinal, 14 archbishops, 77 bishops, 14 church provinces, nearly 20, 000 priests, to say nothing of the thousand on thousands of oath-bound nuns, between 15,040 and 20,000 church buildings, some of them models of architecture and of immense cost of construction. There are 7 great universities, 80 seminaries, or theological institutions, 213 colleges for boys, over 700 academies for girls (to which Protestant mothers send their daughters, and where the daughters become converted to Romanism and furnish the church in turn with Catholic mothers), and nearly 5,000 private schools, each school a protest against the public school system of the Nation. While the population of the United States has increased twenty-five times, the Roman Catholic population, in a little over a century, has increased 320 times, nearly twelve times as fast.

The solidarity of the church is amazing; it seems miraculous.

Out of the fifteen or twenty millions in this country, there is not a Catholic, in the final analysis, who would be disloyal to the church. Whatever his private opinion, in the end, he submits to her as the supreme authority over his conscience and soul. This solidarity extends around the globe. A Catholic church in one place is a duplicate of a Catholic church in every other. What you see in New York you will find in China and in the isles of the sea. Wherever a Catholic sees a Romish church and the cross upon its spire, he knows, whatever may be his nationality or tongue, in that church he will find the same faith, the same worship, which was taught him in his native land, at his mother's knee, and in the hour of his first communion.

This solidarity finds its significance in contrast to the division, the confusion, and the uncertainty of Protestantism.

In this country Romanism has conquered social distinction and an accepted standing.

Not many years ago and the Catholic church was a sort of social pariah, looked down upon with disdain, its services rejected, and its priests regarded with aversion. There was a time when for an American to be a Catholic, was sufficient to ostracise him from family and friends as though he were a religious and social leper. To-day, the Catholic finds all doors open, from the hovel to the palace. The most exclusive sets welcome the priest, invite him to marry their sons and daughters and dedicate private chapels in city homes or summer villas. Where Romanism once stood as the symbol of that which was foreign and alien, it is, today, represented by American families, their names recorded on its marriage books, its birth and baptismal registers. In no land has the Roman Catholic Church more loyal, more devoted, or more liberal supporters than those who claim to be Americans and to the manor born. And startling still is the f act that the Roman Catholic Church is steadily taking the place of the most eloquent defender of the Bible. Startling, indeed! The church which has always been afraid of the Bible; the church which has martyred men and women in cold blood for even daring to read it; the church which is careful in this day to give only an expurgated edition for the common laity to read, and legislates the most severe penalties against the indiscriminate use of the book; the church which has been the actual enemy of the Bible, bitter, deadly, inveterate, exercising all its hatred against it as the source of Protestantism, the arsenal of its weapons, and its mightiest stronghold, this ancient antagonist is now taking the place of Holy Scripture's most uncompromising apologist, rallying to its defence its keenest logicians, its most intellectual writers, its most brilliant orators.

And the Roman Catholic Church is coming into this place, not only by its own seeking, but by reason of the undisguised and wide spread infidelity of the Protestant Church.

Go into so-called, up-to-date Protestant churches, listen to some of their most advanced thinkers and preachers. You will hear them striking at the very foundation of Protestantism, repudiating the only authority on which it can rest the Word of God - the written Word. You will hear them with oracular utterance and much-claimed scholarship rejecting the Old Testament, ridiculing its statements and demonstrating in modern formula that its personages are fictitious, its history worthless, its prophecies unfulfilled, its cosmogony, astronomy and geology unscientific, and the laughing-stock of the learned. You will hear them deny the infallibility of the New Testament, prove its human and not divine inspiration, and set before you a Christ who was limited in knowledge, who was not always sure of his mission, was sometimes filled with vacillation, who was, nevertheless, a good man, and whose death on the cross was simply the tragedy of one too gentle for the times, a good man torn to pieces at last by "the whirling wheel of the world's evil". You will hear them preach the all-Fatherhood of God, the sonship of all men, both good and bad, scout the idea that man is a lost sinner, laugh at the fable of hell and the danger of future punishment, and conclude with the self-satisfied postulate that the great saving force in the earth is the law of evolution; that each man is working out in his own way his own problem; that each man is an avatar of God; that salvation is the reformation of society and the final deliverance of the race from the impedimenta of religiousness, superstition and ignorance. Science, they declare, is the true God and civilisation is its handmaid. In short, in a Protestant pulpit and, specially, if that pulpit is occupied by a recent graduate of an advanced theological institution, you are liable to hear utterances as treasonable to the Word of God and the revealed mission of Jesus Christ, as ever fell from the lips of the most pronounced, most blatant, but unconcealed, infidel and enemy of the church of God.

You will listen in vain to hear such utterances in a Catholic church, be the preacher never so learned, never so bright or brilliant. On the contrary, and with rare sagacity, considering the state of Protestantism, you will hear the Catholic pulpits now echoing with addresses which exalt the Bible as the Word of God, handed over, it is true, to the custody and authoritative interpretation of the church still, but proclaimed, nevertheless, with increasing emphasis as the inspired thought of the living God.

Rome is wise enough to seize the strategic moment and, at the same time, take advantage of the differing opinions, the confusion, and the infidelity among Protestants, to draw attention to the favourite thesis of the church, that the Bible can be read and understood only when under the strict surveillance and inspired interpretation of the church; and that Protestantism with its undivine hands has wrested the Scriptures to its own damnation and the damnation of all who have been led into Protestantism. By this subtle seizure of the opportune moment Romanism places itself in the forefront, not only as the defender of the Bible, but as its only true, sane, and authoritative interpreter.

Not only is the Catholic church taking the place of defender of Holy Scripture and seeking to rescue it from profane hands; it is rapidly rising as the bulwark of the family, the champion of the home. The Roman Catholic Church stands four-square against the growing iniquity and excuseless wickedness of divorce.

The Protestant Church takes no such stand. There is no unity in the Protestant Church concerning this shame. There are to be found Protestant ministers who will, without hesitation, marry a divorced man, or a divorced woman, or both. In some Protestant churches the representative men and women - men and women who are the most liberal supporters of the church and foremost in its work - are divorced people. Condemned as they are by the Word of God and the legislative utterances of our Lord Jesus Christ, they find in the church which professes his name, the church which has been "espoused to him as one husband " instead of judgement, the place of honour and, often, of exalted fellowship.

Not so in the Catholic church. The priest will not marry, baptize or receive into communion those who are living in open defiance of the law and testimony of God. To the Roman Catholic Church marriage is a sacrament, is inviolable, and cannot be annulled by the laws or acts of man. The divorced man or woman may enter a Protestant church and find shelter there. The Roman church shuts its doors and stands like an insurmountable barrier against the inflood of the tide that would shipwreck the home and destroy the sacredness of such holy titles as husband and wife, father and mother.

Unified in faith, defending the Bible, standing against divorce, loyally supported by liberal contributions, the poor being taught to give in the same proportion as the rich, counting among its membership some of the most representative families of America, with stately buildings, schools, colleges and universities, numbering its followers by millions, those millions increased by every steamship that lands its load of emigrants on our shores, and guided by a wisdom, a genius that makes her ready to meet each new demand that will strengthen her cause, absolutely cosmopolitan - Italian in Italy, Spanish in Spain, English in England, Irish in Ireland and, pre-eminently, American in America, she is steadily and marvellously moving on.

Nor is this advance confined alone to religious lines.

Nay, the march is far away beyond that! The Roman Catholic Church in this country is an immense political organisation, holds the balance of voting power, on the eve of a presidential election defeated the candidate whom all the world expected to be successful, and can, if she will, name the next man who shall sit in the Presidential chair.

In the year 1902, the mission of the present incumbent of the White House to the Vatican was a political one. He was to all intents and purposes accredited from these United States as Ambassador to the Pope of Rome. He had instructions from the Secretary of State which said: "Any negotiations which you may desire on the part of the officers of the civil court or of military officers to enable you to perform your negotiation with the Vatican will be afforded"; and this high Commissioner from the United States acted and spoke in Rome as the special envoy of the great American Republic to the Catholic Church. He was received and accepted by the ambassadors to the Pope as one of themselves; and in a remarkable ceremony at Saint Peter's, he was invited as an ambassador to the Roman Catholic Church, and took his place in the diplomatic tribune. Besides all that, an agreement was entered into between the Pope and himself concerning the Catholic Church in the Philippines and, although the contract failed, yet, as a recent writer, himself a Catholic, has said: "This does not destroy the fact that Washington was ready to enter into a regular treaty with the Pope, similar to those existing between the Vatican and the leading Catholic governments of the world."

Today, Romanism is politically, as well as religiously, entrenched in the great cities of our land and, from its university centre at Washington, exercises its mysterious and far-reaching power. Romanists confidently expect the time to arrive when the whole land will be under its political control; when the machinery of office and legislation will be in the power of the church and when, with her astounding increase of numbers, she will be the religious and political dictator of the new world.

The grasp of Rome is on the sceptre of temporal power. It is true, France has separated her from the State and, for a time, refuses to carry her; it is true, the Vatican and the Quirinal are at odds in Italy, and the Pope still styles himself "prisoner" in Rome; it is true that Spain is in the throes of an issue whether the civil or the religious power shall dominate. But, while the separation has taken place in France, that "eldest daughter of the church", a sentiment has been aroused and a partisanship for Rome emphasized such as has not been seen since the days when Versailles and the Vatican were in intimate touch. Italy is loyal to the king, proud of the day when Garibaldi broke through the walls of the "holy" city and gave her the right of civic liberty; but Italy is Catholic even to frenzy, and no matter how many millions may be spent on the new capitol, or how far Paganism may be glorified in the re-opening of the Appian Way, to the Italian, the dome of Saint Peter's still overtops the Parthenon and the palace of the king. Spain may advance sufficiently out of the gloom of candle-light into the glare of the electric light; she may allow the breath of Twentieth Century toleration to breathe through her streets, permitting Protestants to write the name of their church on the walls of their buildings; she may, in an issue, exalt the civil authority into its due place, but the born Catholic in Spain looks upon Spain as the kingdom of Jesus Christ and blindly and fanatically, even unto death, believes that in the Roman Church Jesus Christ is alone to be found; and that, in final terms, Spain and the kingdom of the Roman Church are one. Should the issue for one moment depart from the civil and become religious, the government would be overthrown in a night and Alphonse and his English Queen repudiated as foes to the faith.

It is true that Germany has protested against the last encyclical, but this very protest is a witness that the Germany of today is not the Germany of Luther, nor the days of the Great Elector; that she does no more than protest is a witness that the political power of Rome has been felt upon the banks of the Spree, and that the Protestant Emperor of the birth land of Protestantism is satisfied to go no further than the limits of diplomacy permit. And it is because of this that Rome with her soft tread and more than mortal wisdom has accepted the protest, explained the encyclical, and given orders that it shall not be read in German churches. It is the answer, not of a trembling suppliant, but of a church that feels itself sufficiently strong in the headquarters of the Reformation to meet diplomacy with diplomacy.

Rome may be turned back for a moment, for a season be deflected from her course, but her course is onward. Those who hail the present separation of church and state in Europe as a witness of the waning power of the church as a political factor have only to reflect that separation in this country is more radical, more absolute, than it is, or ever can be, in Europe; and that in this country, in spite of the separation, the church increases in population, adds to her wealth, and is to-day the mightiest force at the polls; it is only necessary to contemplate the results of separation here, to see that separation in Europe is no evidence of the diminution of her strength, but is, really, in the sympathy and partisanship which it is sure to arouse, one of the guarantees of her final ascension to sovereignty and power.

While Protestantism is at war with itself - is full of treason to Holy Scripture, and is breaking up into new and more absurd denominational factions every day - Rome, systematically, unrelentingly, and yet smoothly, secretly, and without noise, is marching to her ordained place.

Protestantism lifts up the banner of guess, of doubt, of dethroned authority, and stands insistently for organised uncertainty.

Rome speaks with certainty, with authority and relentless fixity.

Protestantism seeks favour of the unbelieving world, apologises for her creeds, and would establish herself by denying them.

Romanism hurls anathema at the unbeliever, magnifies her office, and claims to be wholly divine.

Protestantism builds schools, and endows universities, that she may teach the rising generation to reckon doubt as the beginning of wisdom, and unbelief as the sign-patent of knowledge.

Romanism spends her wealth in establishing schools and institutions of learning that she may lay hold of the rising youth and teach them that the church is the symbol of God, and that the highest wisdom is to obey her commands.

Protestantism, in its reaction from ritualism, has turned the church into a lecture room and destroyed the feeling of reverence.

Romanism sanctifies her buildings and creates a feeling of awe within the shadow of her churches.

The Protestant enters his church as one might enter a concert room or a hall of debate.

The Romanist bows on the threshold of his church as the sanctuary of God.

Protestantism has stepped down on to the high road of the natural and the commonplace.

Romanism more and more exalts itself into the realm of the supernatural.

Protestantism prides itself on the denial of miracles.

Romanism claims to work them.

Protestantism carries with it the impression of newness and divisibility.

Romanism is covered with the dust of centuries, has in it the echo of the distant ages, and is superior to schism.

As the present age goes on, multitudes will turn away from the interrogation points of Protestantism, to the unqualified assertion and assurance of Romanism, to her gorgeous ritual, her spectacular worship, the glamour of her two thousand years of unbroken history, and the fact that, on the edge of eternity, she offers to take the whole responsibility of a human being, prepare him for the hour and the article of death, go with him into the shadows, keep with him by her power and influence in the unseen world, nor quit him till she has delivered him from danger, and secured him, as she claims, in the mercy of God.

Some years ago, while on an ocean trip, I became acquainted with a versatile Irishman, a graduate of Dublin university, and a world wide traveller. He had eaten rice with the Chinese, tasted salt with the Arabs of the desert, clinked his glass in the offices of the Quai d'Orsay, was able to express his suggestive thoughts in the fluency of some half dozen languages beside his own, and was as much at home in one as in another. He was, when I met him, in the employ of the British Government, and had been a commissioner to this country. He was witty, at times full of pathos, mercurial and, frequently, overflowing with wordy heat. He was a scholar. He was abreast of the times. He claimed to be an agnostic. His speech was spiced with satire against the Christian religion. He said nothing coarse, but his assaults were keen, far-reaching and, often, cut me to the heart. One night as we drew near to the Irish coast, we sat together in the aft of the ship where we could see the phosphorescent glow in the waves. He was in a reflective mood. He spoke of the brevity and the uncertainty of life and, then, of the eternity beyond. Suddenly he turned to me and said, calling me by name: "When I die, I am going to die a good Catholic. I am going to have mass said for my soul. I have made provision for that." Seeing my amazement and that I was, evidently, puzzled to know whether he was seeking to outdo himself in travesty, he said earnestly: "Do not misunderstand me; I am an unbeliever, but I am superstitious. I have been brought up a Catholic. As I look about me in the world, the Church is the only thing which has seemed to stand in the midst of changing mentality and the reversal of human knowledge. To stand unmoved in the swirl of such conditions counts for something. The Church comes with an audacious claim of authority and the power of completeness. She leaves nothing for me to do. She takes all the responsibility for my soul - for the past and the future. You may call it what you please, but I tell you, her position counts in the end, and I am going to give my soul, if I have one, over into her hands. She is the only thing that offers certainty when you are about to leave this world."

It was pitiful, but it was, and is, an illustration of how thousands feel, and how that feeling is likely to grow in the increasing infidelity and guess of Protestantism, in its total surrender of all final authority, and in its suicidal determination to wash its hands of the soul's future.

It is this appeal to the latent superstition in man, this splendid and uncompromising assertion, this unfaltering claim of authority, this unity of faith, together with the most perfect organisation on earth, and the unalterable purpose to be supreme in the world, that will give the Catholic Church her underhold in the final religious and political struggle of the age.

Everything is making for that hour when Rome, once more seated on the back of human government, will rule the earth.

The revival of Romanism is, then, a sign of the times. It is a sign that the world is hastening on to its Roman and Antichristian climax; and, by just so much, it is an increased and solemn warning that at any moment the Lord may descend in his unheralded secrecy, and snatch away from earth to Himself all who are truly His. It is the solemn warning that, at any moment, those who have made a mere profession of His Name; who have no real knowledge of Him in the heart; who, in spite of the profession they make, still walk according to "the course of this world", will be left behind to the judgements of the Great Tribulation, and the righteous wrath of a long suffering God.

Well, indeed, may we heed the admonition of the Apostle Peter: "Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure." (II Peter 1:10.)

It is fitting that we should hear the searching words of Paul: "It is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation [that is, the redemption and glorifying of our bodies at the Coming of the Lord] nearer than when we believed.

"The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.

"Let us walk honestly, as in the day [the day of Christ]; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying.

"But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof." (Romans 13:11-14.)
The Resurrection of Indulgences or Is Tetzel really dead?
Pope John Paul II has revived the practice of earning indulgences, a decision which has caused concern and embarrassed among British Roman Catholics.
Professor Arthur Noble

Pope John Paul II has revived the practice of earning indulgences, a decision which has caused concern and embarrassed among British Roman Catholics. On the first Sunday of Advent he issued a Papal Bull for the Millennium, Incarnationis Mysterium (The Mystery of the Incarnation), which describes in detail how Roman Catholics may obtain indulgences both for themselves and for souls in Purgatory.

The Romish dogma of indulgences lies at the very heart of the historical conflict between Biblical Christianity and the Vatican. It was the major factor in the gathering storm that instigated Luther's revolt against the corrupt pecuniary practices of the Roman Church and led to the victory of the Reformation. The fact that the present Pope has just announced the revival of the false doctrine of indulgences proves that the spirit of Tetzel, far from dying out, merely slumbered on, unawakened by the enlightenment of the sixteenth century. Those who had imagined otherwise must be reminded of Rome's boast that she never changes. With the Millennium on the horizon, the Pope is attempting to re-instate the spiritual darkness of the Middle Ages! Semper eadem! No change except for the change that is soon to tinkle once again in the coffers of the Vatican!

What is an indulgence?

The 22nd article of the Roman Creed is: "I do affirm that the power of indulgences was left by Christ in the church, and that the use of them is very beneficial to Christian people."

Dr. Ludwig Ott, in Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (p. 441) states: "By an indulgence (indulgentia) is understood the extra-sacramental remission of the temporal punishment of sin remaining after the forgiveness of the guilt of sin."

Rome claims that this remission is valid in the sight of God, and that it is granted by the Church out of her treasury of satisfaction. It is the remission in whole or in part of the temporal punishment [225] due for sins which have been forgiven. The gaining of these and other credits is necessary because the Sacrament of Penance [210] does not fully satisfy for punishment due. To gain an indulgence, one must be in a state of grace (free from mortal sin [196]) and perform whatever work is required for the indulgence. The remission is made by applying some of the Treasury of Merit [274] which the Church possesses. The indulgence is a transfer of merit from one person to another and offers a lessening of Purgatory [226]. Plenary indulgences remit all temporal punishment; partial indulgences remit a portion of this punishment. There is also the application of indulgences to departed souls, which is admitted by Roman Catholic writers to be of recent date.

The Wanderer of June 10, 1994, summarising paragraphs 1471-1479 of The Catechism of the Catholic Church, gives the following definition:

"An indulgence is a remission of the temporal punishment due to sins that have already been forgiven in the Sacrament of Penance. This temporal punishment exists because every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in a state called Purgatory. Indulgences are obtained through he Church, which opens to us the treasury of merits of Christ and the saints. The remission can be plenary or partial, depending on whether it removes all or only some of the temporal punishment attached to sin. The indulgence can be applied to the person performing the works of devotion, penance, and charity or to a soul in Purgatory."

Fulano, in Romish Indulgences of Today. An Exposure [London, 1902, p. 82f.], provides a memorable definition of indulgences:

"[...] Rome, by means of deft definitions, lifts the burden of eternal guilt and punishment of sin off the Roman Catholic sinner - only to re-impose, by means of her definition of poena temporalis [temporal punishment] another burden scarcely less appalling. The pains of Purgatory are substituted for the pains of Hell - and then this 're-imposed penalty', as we might call it (practically the only penalty which Romanists yet fear) - this one the Catholic Church graciously takes away in whole or in part by her Indulgences. Rome is an Indulgent Mother!"

A little history…

The Middle Ages

Indulgences were originally introduced in the eleventh century and arose in connection with the so-called sacrament of penance, which was claimed to assure the penitent sinner of the forgiveness of sins while making a distinction between the guilt and the punishment of the sin. According to the Church of Rome, the former was forgiven by God through the priest. The latter, however, had to be met through the performance of certain good works such as fasting, the recitation of certain prayers, pilgrimages, or alms.

In the fourteenth century we find the partial substitution of money gifts for works of mercy and charity, a fact which already laid the train for the Reformation: even notable Roman Catholics such as Juan de Valdez, the brother of the secretary of the Emperor Charles V, admitted the corruption of such practices:

"I see that we can scarcely get anything from Christ's ministers but for money, at bishopping money, at marriage money, for confession money - no, not extreme unction without money! They will ring no bells without money, no burial in the church without money; so that it seemeth that Paradise is shut up without money. The rich is buried in the church, the poor in the churchyard. [...] The rich man may readily get large indulgences, but the poor none, because he wanteth money to pay for them."

The practice of selling indulgences, with its falsification of Biblical truth as well as scandalous financial exploitation of the populace, thereafter increased significantly until in Luther's time it led Europe to the brink of revolution and caused the mighty revolt against Rome in the form of the glorious Protestant Reformation.

The Reformation period

The event that brought the latent crisis into the open was the public sale of indulgences by a notorious Dominican friar, Johann Tetzel, in 1517. He was the Vatican's "Apostolic Commissary for all Germany and Inquisitor of Heretical Pravity" during the popedom of Leo X (1513-1521). His indulgence-brokering activities, which soon aroused Luther's righteous indignation, were part of a corrupt and ambitious ecclesiastical scheme by Leo to provide funds for the reconstruction of St. Peter's in Rome, the most lavishly expensive mass house of Romanism. It cost £12 million, a colossal sum in 16th-century terms and more than all the money expended on it by successive Popes, and took 111 years to build. Leo was advised by Cardinal Pucci to publish a sale of indulgences throughout Europe for the purpose of replenishing the pontifical exchequer and finishing the work on St. Peter's begun by Julius II (1503-1513). Little did they realise that the project, paid for by their dupes both rich and poor, would cripple the permanent resources of the Papacy and lead to the decline, if not the downfall, of Romanism.

Leo was the friend and protector of the artists Raphael and Michelangelo - the splendour-loving Renaissance Pope of the Medici family. He had commissioned Albrecht of Brandenburg, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Mainz, with the task of collecting the money in Germany. Tetzel acted on Leo's orders and went from town to town, offering varying spiritual benefits to his spiritual dupes in return for the payment of appropriate amounts of money.

The people were still ignorant enough to believe in the Pope's power to grant pardons for sins. Thus there was no doubt that they would buy the 'pardons', and so gold would flow into the coffers of Rome. Tetzel told them: "You should know that all who confess and in penance put alms into the coffer according to the counsel of the confessor, will obtain complete remission of all their sins." [Translated from a sermon by Tetzel quoted in Martin Luthers Sämmtliche Schriften, Erfurt, 1717, pp. 46ff.]

There was one obstacle. Princes were growing jealous of their subjects' money being taken by the Vatican. Leo X, however, got over this obstacle by giving them a share in the spoil. He offered Henry VIII one quarter of what came from England, but Henry haggled and bargained to get a third! Since kings had made themselves poor by their wars, a share in the Papal spoils on their own subjects was a greater temptation than they could resist.

Erasmus, in his Praise of Folly (1509), had described indulgences as "the crime of false pardons". In every letter and book that he wrote since then he bitterly complained that the Pope and the Princes were resorting to them again. "Ecclesiastical hypocrites," he wrote, "rule in the courts of princes. The Court of Rome has lost all sense of shame. [...] I see that the very height of tyranny has been reached. The Pope and Kings count the people not as men, but as cattle in the market!"

Luther's attack followed when, on the eve of the Feast of All Saints, 1517, he nailed his famous Ninety-Five Theses to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg. The major theme of a large number of these is his assault on the theory and practice of indulgences. To quote but the most famous: "Those who believe that they can be certain of their salvation because they have indulgence letters will be eternally damned, together with their teachers." (32) "It is vain to trust in salvation by indulgence letters, even though the indulgence commissary, or even the Pope, were to offer his soul as security." (52)

The post-Reformation period

The corrupt and demoralising traffic in indulgences nevertheless continued. Sir Matthew Hale (1609-1676), one of the greatest seventeenth-century scholars on the history of English common law, denounced it in the following words: "They have corrupted, as much as in them lies, the most pure and innocent religion the world ever knew, by distorting it to ends of wealth and power."

In the nineteenth-century the administration of Pius IX (1846-1878) declared that indulgences would "continue to be gained in the same manner and form as heretofore". [Letter of Chargé d'Affaires of the Holy See to the Archbishop of Toledo, October 1, 1854]

… and the repetition of history

Has Rome changed its dogma of indulgences today?

While Paul VI (1963-1978) admitted some misuse of indulgences in the past, he still re-affirmed the basic Roman Catholic concept of indulgences as outlined in the definitions above. His encyclical Indulgentarium Doctrina (The Doctrine of Indulgences) of 1967 formulated new laws concerning indulgences, but these merely (1) abolished the value of partial indulgences using days and years, (2) reduced the number of plenary indulgences, and (3) detached them from particular things and places. In other words: a familiar change of face without the slightest change of substance! In his Enchiridion Indulgentiarum (A Handbook of Indulgences) of 1968 he merely reduced the number of works and prayers of indulgence to about 70 and said that the previous practice of attaching a certain number of days or years to a specific task was no longer in effect.

In November, 1998, Pope John Paul II issued a document called The Mystery of the Incarnation with an appendix explaining how indulgences can be obtained. The Church, it declares, will offer a plenary (full) indulgence during the coming so-called Holy Year (December 24, 1999, to January 6, 2001). The requirements are much simpler than ever before and have annoyed Romanist writers such as Richard McBrien, who sees in this decree a return to "a calculating, egocentric approach to Christian destiny, where an individual is concerned primarily with the accumulation of spiritual 'credits'." (R. McBrien: Roman Catholicism)

The blasphemy of indulgence-peddling

Luther, as the servant of Christ, knew from the Scriptures the unconditional pardon offered to those who accept "repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 20:21), the doctrine preached by the Apostles. None of the Apostles ever exercised an authority to declare pardon as an intermediary to any individual on the ground of the merit of either sinner or Saviour, whether for the consideration of a sum of money, or gratis. Tetzel, as the servant of corruption, was a vendor of worthless Papal wares, and as such he inflamed Luther against such a profanation of Christianity.

The Reformation restored to the world not only the grand doctrine of justification by faith alone, but also the doctrine of repentance. Milton, denouncing the errors of Romanism, wrote:

"When I recall to mind, at last, after so many dark ages, wherein the huge overshadowing train of error had almost swept all the stars out of the firmament of the church - how the bright and blissful Reformation, by divine power, struck through the black and settled night of ignorance and antichristian tyranny; methinks a sovereign and reviving joy must needs rush into the bosom of him that reads or hears, and the sweet odour of the returning gospel embathe his soul with the fragrancy of heaven."

Let the Bible speak against indulgences and let us rejoice in the knowledge of the truth: "[...] ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot [...]." (I Peter 1:18-19)

The sale of indulgences. On a pole, in the form of a cross, hangs the Papal authorisation for the sale; on the ground lie scales; two sacks of coins show the profit.

Caricature of Tetzel's sale of indulgences. The last two lines of the German poem recount the famous verse attributed to Tetzel: "As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, / The soul at once into Heaven springs."

From the Passional of Christ and Antichrist, a Reformation pamphlet of 1521: "Christ drives the money-changers out of the Temple" (John 2) (left) and "The Pope sells special favours" (right).
Christ and the Pope
A Contrast compiled by Professor Arthur Noble
Professor Arthur Noble

Affixed to a column at the corner of the Orsini Palace in Rome at the beginning of the sixteenth century was the following comparison between Christ and the Pope:

* Christ said: "My kingdom is not of this world." The Pope conquers cities by force.
* Christ had a crown of thorns. The Pope wears a triple diadem.
* Christ washed the feet of his disciples. The Pope has his kissed by kings.
* Christ paid tribute. The Pope takes it.
* Christ fed the sheep. The Pope shears them for his own profit.
* Christ was poor. The Pope wishes to be master of the world.
* Christ carried on His shoulders the cross. The Pope is carried on the shoulders of his servants in liveries of gold.
* Christ despised riches. The Pope has no other passion than for gold.
* Christ drove out the merchants from the temple. The Pope welcomes them.
* Christ preached peace. The Pope is the torch of war.
* Christ was meekness. The Pope is pride personified.
* Christ promulgated laws that the Pope tramples underfoot.

[Quoted by Jeremiah J. Crowley: Romanism. A Menace to the Nation. Aurora, Missouri, 1912, p. 205.]

Christ knew no sin. Scores of the self-styled 'Vicars of Christ' – the professing 'Holy Fathers' – were so depraved and base that they left a history of adultery, bribery, debauchery, drunkenness, fornication, incest, murder, perversion, rape, seduction, simony, sodomy, treachery and whoredom. After a visit to Rome, the great Italian poet Dante described the Vatican as a "sewer of corruption". [Quoted in Ralph Woodrow: Babylon. Mystery Religion. Riverside, California, 1966, p. 94f.]

Christ told his followers to keep the commandments. The Popes have methodically broken them all. Instead of practising "Thou shall not kill", Innocent III (1198-1216) not only surpassed all his predecessors in killing, but founded the most devilish institution in history – the Inquisition, which for over five hundred years was used by his successors to maintain their power against those who did not agree with the teachings of the Romish Church. It is estimated that that Church, throughout history, has been responsible for the wilful slaughter of over 100 million people.

Christ preached: "Blessed are the peacemakers." Pope Julius II (1503-13) had a passion for war bordering on frenzy. His pontificate was a perpetual war, and Europe knew no peace during the period of his life. One may easily imagine the state of the Church under a Vicar of Christ who spent his time in a camp, amidst the clash of arms, and who knew no other glory than that procured in war or the pillage of a town. His successors have faithfully carried on the belligerent tradition, supporting dictators and stirring up strife to achieve their corrupt aims.

Non-Roman-Catholic countries are being brainwashed today into believing that the nature and aims of the Roman Pontiff and his Church are not what they used to be; but Rome is ever and everywhere semper eadem, always the same. As she was throughout past centuries, so she remains today, except that she is now playing politics more astutely than she was previously.

So it is that Mangasarian, warning of Rome's thirst for American blood, states the following as "the verdict of history":

* Where the priests are free, the people are slaves!
* Where the priests are rich, the people are poor!
* Where the priests teach, the people are ignorant!
* Where the priests prosper, progress is paralysed!
* Where the priests lead, they lead into misery, bondage, poverty, superstition, persecution – ruin!

[Quoted by Crowley, p. 203.]

The nineteenth-century English politician, essayist, poet, and historian Lord Macaulay, best known for his 5-volume History of England, memorably described the Papal system when he wrote:

"The experience of twelve hundred eventful years, the ingenuity and patient care of forty generations of statesmen, have improved the polity [of the Church of Rome] to such perfection that, among the contrivances that have been devised for deceiving and oppressing mankind, it occupies the highest place." [Quoted by Crowley, p. 203.]

Today, as ever, the same 'Vicar of Christ', 'Our Lord God the Pope', 'King of Heaven, Earth and Hell', while claiming to represent the lowly and humble Nazarene, still wears a triple crown of priceless value and robes resplendent with jewels! As Crowley has well said [p. 205]: "Christ had not whereon to lay His head. The Pope dwells in a Palace of four thousand rooms! What a mockery! What a delusion! What a snare is Popery!"
The Relics of Romanism
The gross superstition and idolatry that have accompanied the use of relics reveal the deception and inconsistency with which Romanism has been plagued for centuries.
Professor Arthur Noble

The gross superstition and idolatry that have accompanied the use of relics reveal the deception and inconsistency with which Romanism has been plagued for centuries.

Among the Roman Catholic Church's most highly venerated relics have been pieces of the "true Cross". So many of these were scattered throughout Europe and other parts of the world that Calvin once said that if all pieces were gathered together, they would form a good ship-load; yet the Cross of Christ was carried by one individual! Are we to believe that these pieces miraculously multiplied as when Jesus blessed the loaves and fishes? Such was apparently the belief of St. Paulinus who spoke of "the reintegration of the Cross", i.e. that it "never grew smaller in size, no matter how many pieces were detached from it"! [The Catholic Encyclopaedia, Vol. 4, p. 524]

The great Swiss reformer John Calvin (1509-1564) mentioned the inconsistency of various relics of his day. Several churches claimed to have the Crown of Thorns; others claimed to have the water-pots used by Jesus in the miracle at Cana. Some of the wine was to be found at Orleans. Concerning a piece of broiled fish which Peter offered to Jesus, Calvin said: "It must have been wondrously well salted, if it has kept for such a long series of ages."

What was allegedly the crib of Jesus was exhibited for veneration every Christmas Eve at St. Mary Major's in Rome. Several churches claimed to have the baby clothes of Jesus. The Church of St. James in Rome displayed what was claimed to be the altar on which Jesus was placed when He was presented in the temple. Even the foreskin (from His circumcision) was shown by the monks of Charroux, who, as a proof of its genuineness, declared that it yielded drops of blood. [Calvin's Tracts, Vol. 1, pp. 296-304] Several churches claimed to possess the "holy prepuce", including a church at Coulombs, France, the Church of St. John in Rome, and the Church of Puy in Velay! [John P. Wilder: The Other Side of Rome, Grand Rapids, 1959, p. 54]

Other relics include Joseph's carpenter tools, bones of the donkey on which Jesus rode into Jerusalem, the cup used at the Last Supper, the empty purse of Judas, Pilate's basin, the coat of purple thrown over Jesus by the mocking soldiers, the sponge lifted up to Him on the Cross, nails from the Cross, specimens of the hair of the Virgin Mary (some brown, some blond, some red, and some black), her skirts, wedding ring, slippers, veil, and even a bottle of the milk on which Jesus had been suckled. [Wilder, p. 53]

According to Romanist belief, Mary's body was miraculously taken up to Heaven; but several different churches in Europe did claim to have the body of Mary's mother, even though we know nothing about her and she was not even credited with the name "St. Ann" until a few centuries ago!

Even more laughable is the story about Mary's house. Roman Catholics believe that the house in which Mary lived at Nazareth is now in the little town of Loreto, Italy, having been transported there by angels! The Catholic Encyclopaedia says:

"Since the fifteenth century, and possibly even earlier, the 'Holy House' of Loreto has been numbered among the most famous shrines of Italy [...]. The interior measures only thirty-one feet by thirteen. An altar stands at one end beneath a statue, blackened with age, of the Virgin Mother and her Divine Infant, [...] venerable throughout the world on account of the Divine mysteries accomplished in it. [...] It is here that most holy Mary, Mother of God, was born; here that she was saluted by the Angel; here that the eternal Word was made Flesh. Angels conveyed this House from Palestine to the town Tersato in Illyria in the year of salvation 1291 in the pontificate of Nicholas IV. Three years later, in the beginning of the pontificate of Boniface VIII, it was carried again by the ministry of angels and placed in a wood [...], where, having changed its station thrice in the course of a year, at length, by the will of God, it took up its permanent position on this spot. [...] That the traditions thus boldly proclaimed to the world have been fully sanctioned by the Holy See cannot for a moment remain in doubt. More than forty-seven popes have in various ways rendered honour to the shrine, and an immense number of Bulls and Briefs proclaim without qualification the identity of the Santa Casa di Loreto with the Holy House of Nazareth" ! [The Catholic Encyclopaedia, Vol. 13, p. 454]

The veneration of dead bodies of martyrs was ordered by the Council of Trent, the Council which also condemned those who did not believe in relics: "The holy bodies of holy martyrs [...] are to be venerated by the faithful, for through these bodies many benefits are bestowed by God on men, so that they who affirm that veneration and honour are not due to the relics of the saints [...] are wholly to be condemned, as the Church has already long since condemned, and also now condemns them." [The Catholic Encyclopaedia, Vol. 12, p. 737] Of course, because it was believed that "many benefits" could come through the bones of dead men, the sale of bodies and bones became big business for the Church of Rome!

In about 750, long lines of wagons constantly came to Rome bringing immense quantities of skulls and skeletons which were sorted, labelled, and sold by the popes. [H.B. Cotterill: Mediaeval Italy, New York, 1915, p. 71] Graves were plundered by night and tombs in churches were watched by armed men! No wonder Gregorovius wrote: "Rome was like a mouldering cemetery in which hyenas howled and fought as they dug greedily after corpses." [Quoted by Ralph Woodrow: Babylon, Mystery Religion, Riverside, California, 1966, p. 62]

There is in the Church of St. Prassede a marble slab which states that in 817 Pope Paschal had the bodies of 2,300 martyrs transferred from cemeteries to this church. [Cotterill, p. 391] When Pope Boniface IV converted the Pantheon into a Romanist church in about 609, "twenty-eight cartloads of sacred bones were said to have been removed from the Catacombs and placed in a prophyry basin beneath the high altar". [The Catholic Encyclopaedia, Vol. 2, p. 661]

Placing bones beneath a church or other relics was a requirement for "consecrating" the ground and the building. The Castle Church at Wittenberg in Germany, to the door of which Luther nailed his famous Ninety-five Theses, had 19,000 saintly relics! [Will Durant: The Story of Civilisation: Caesar and Christ, New York, 1944-1977, Vol. 6, p. 339] Bishops were forbidden by the second Nicaean Council in 787 to dedicate a building if no relics were present; the penalty for so doing was excommunication!

Were these ideas taken from the Bible or from paganism?

In the old legends, when Nimrod, the false "saviour" of Babylon, died, his body was torn limb from limb – part being buried one place, and part in another. When he was "resurrected", becoming the sun-god, it was taught that he was now in a different body, the members of the old body being left behind. This is in stark contrast to the death of the true Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, of Whom it was prophesied: "A bone of him shall not be broken" (John 19:36), and Who was resurrected in the true sense of the word. The resurrection of Christ resulted in an empty tomb, no parts of His body being left behind for relics!

In the old Babylonian mystery religion from which Romanism is derived, the various places where it was believed a bone of a god was buried were considered sacred – "consecrated" by a bone. "Egypt was covered with sepulchres of its martyred god; and many a leg and arm and skull, all vouched to be genuine, were exhibited in the rival burying places for the adoration of the Egyptian faithful." [Alexander Hislop: The Two Babylons, New York, 1959, p. 179]

Needless to say, the use of relics is very ancient and did not originate with Christianity. Even The Catholic Encyclopaedia actually admits that the use "of some object, notably part of the body or clothes, remaining as a memorial of a departed saint" was in existence "before the propagation of Christianity" and "the veneration of relics, in fact, is to some extent a primitive instinct associated with many other religious systems besides that of Christianity". [The Catholic Encyclopaedia, Vol. 12, p. 734]

If Christ and the Apostles did not use relics, but the use of such was known prior to Christianity and among other religions, do we not have another example of a pagan idea being 'Christianised' by the Church of Rome?

Relics can have no part in true worship, for "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." (John 4:24) The extremism to which the use of imaginary and faked relics has led in the Church of Rome is certainly not "truth".

Some of the bones that were at one time acclaimed as the bones of saints have been exposed as the bones of animals! In Spain, a cathedral once displayed what was said to be part of a wing of the Angel Gabriel when he visited Mary. Upon investigation, however, it was found to be a magnificent ostrich feather! [Lorraine Boettner: Roman Catholicism, Philadelphia, 1962, p. 290]

The Catholic Encyclopaedia itself recognises that many relics are "doubtful", but fails to admit that probably all of them are fakes: "Many of the more ancient relics duly exhibited for veneration in the great sanctuaries of Christendom or even at Rome itself must now be pronounced to be either certainly spurious or open to grave suspicion [...]. Difficulties might be urged against the supposed 'column of the flagellation' venerated at Rome in the Church of Santa Prassede and against many other famous relics." [The Catholic Encyclopaedia, Vol. 12, p. 737] So much for the infallibility of Papal pronouncements!

How, then, is this discrepancy explained? The Catholic Encyclopaedia continues: "[...] no dishonour is done to God by the continuance of an error which has been handed down in perfect good faith for many centuries. [...] Hence there is justification for the practice of the Holy See in allowing the cult of certain doubtful ancient relics to continue." In other words, it is acceptable to believe a lie.

Even if we did have one of Mary's hairs, or a bone of the apostle Paul, or the robe of Jesus, would God be pleased with these things being used as objects of worship? According to the example of the brass serpent of Moses, He would not. If there is no real virtue in the actual hair, bone, or robe, how much less merit can there be in relics which are known to be fakes?

[Adapted, with acknowledgement, from Ralph Woodrow: Babylon, Mystery Religion.]
Papal Supremacy - A Refuge Of Lies
'Papal supremacy' is the outcome of 'Papal infallibility'. It is the corrupt fruit of a corrupt tree.
Rev. Kyle Paisley

'Papal supremacy' is the outcome of 'Papal infallibility'. It is the corrupt fruit of a corrupt tree.

Claims to supremacy are very wide. It is asserted with regard to both politics and religion. Temporal and spiritual supremacy is the proud boast of Antichrist. The matter of spiritual supremacy is the more serious. The decree of Pope Boniface VIII states: "Temporal authority must be subject to spiritual power." Pius IX, writing to the Emperor of Germany on 7th August, 1873, said: "Every one who has been baptized belongs in some way to the Pope."

Lest any ecumenist should say that Rome's position has changed, bear in mind the following excerpts from A Catechism of Catholic Doctrine (Revised edition, 1985): "The Pope is the spiritual father of all Christians. […] The Pope is the Shepherd and Teacher of all Christians." What is this, if it is not a claim to supremacy?

Claims to supremacy are not only wide but wicked. They gender deception by turning souls away from Christ to trust in a man, all the while with the belief that this will bring salvation.

Boniface VIII decreed: "It is necessary for everyone who is to be saved to be subject to the Roman Pontiff"; but Christ said: "I am the way, the truth and the life. No man cometh unto the Father, but by me." The claims to supremacy are wicked because they are an attempt to rob God of His glory. The blasphemous character of this boasted pre-eminence is seen in the divine name the Pope takes to himself. He is called 'Holy Father'. The Council of Pisa described him thus: "The most holy and blessed one […], the Lord of the Universe." The only true and living God will not smile on such arrogance. Isaiah 42:8: "I am the Lord: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another […]."

Papal aspirations to supremacy are wrong. They are based upon a wresting of the Scriptures. For example, concerning Christ's words to Peter (who, it is said by Rome, was the first in the line of the Popes) in John 21:15-17: "Feed my sheep. […] Feed my lambs", a most unnatural explanation is given. Rome construes the command as a commission to Peter to take charge of the whole church, pastors and people, whereas the injunction given to him is also given to all pastors: "[…] feed the church of God." (Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:2.)

Ideas of Papal absolutism have also been advanced by forgeries - for example, the Donation of Constantine, purported to have been written by him and conferring vast privileges on the Church of Rome. It was published for the first time in the middle of the eighth Century. Attached was the fable that it was granted by Constantine on the occasion of his being baptized by Pope Sylvester as a grateful return for his having been cured of leprosy by the baptismal water. The evidence of history proves that Constantine was never afflicted with leprosy and was not baptized until he was on his deathbed.
The idea of supremacy is without foundation in Scripture, and since it needs lies to bolster it up it must be refused. The idea of supremacy is without foundation in Scripture, and since it needs lies to bolster it up it must be refused. How tragic it is that so many should remain faithful to the Papal system and instead of looking for Christ alone for salvation look to Rome. The future for those who remain in such a state is awful: "Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet; and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies […]." (Isaiah 28:17.)
A Curious Instance Of Papal Infalliblity
Exposed by C.H. Spurgeon for The Sword and Trowel, 1888
C.H. Spurgeon

Hardly can we remember so singular an incident as that which Dr. Wright records in the interesting pamphlet which now lies before us. If we had hitherto believed in the infallibility of the Pope of Rome, the fact here recorded would have delivered us from the delusion, and we trust the making of it known may have a like effect upon those who are now the victims of that fiction.

It seems that a certain M. Henri Leserre found great benefit for his sore eyes from his faith in the water of Lourdes Grotto, and invocations of the Blessed Virgin. Abundant facts prove that faith in anything has a curative effect. Whether it is a doll dressed in satin, as at Larghetto, or a doctor with a wide reputation, or a quack medicine, or an old woman, or a broomstick; if you have confidence that you will be cured, it goes a long way towards curing you. That, however, is not the point. M. Leserre was grateful for his cure, and, moved by that gratitude, wrote a book, entitled Notre Dame de Lourdes. It was the making of the place. His pen caused Our Lady of Lourdes to be much sought after; for his writing was charmingly attractive, and secured hosts of readers.

On a happy day, M. Leserre discovered the Four Gospels, and was greatly impressed by them. He thought that the fourfold story of Jesus was the very book that France wanted; and he thought most wisely. He devoutly set to work to translate the original into the French of the day; making, not exactly a literal translation, but one which would command a reading from the ordinary Frenchman. Not in chapters and verses, but like an ordinary book, the Gospel narrative flowed on in a charming manner. The version was as faithful as Henri Leserre could make it; it would not quite satisfy an evangelical believer, but it was a wonderful performance for the Roman Catholic Church. For a preface, it bore in its forefront a lamentation over the neglect of the Gospels by Catholics. He exclaims: "The Gospel - the most illustrious book in the world - is become an unknown book." Strange that such a book, with such a preface, should be dedicated to "Notre Dame de Lourdes". But there was something stranger. The book appeared with an imprimateur of the Archbishop of Paris, and the approval and benediction of the Pope!! Note this -

"The Holy Father has received, in regular course, the French translation of the Gospels, which you have undertaken and accomplished, to the delight and with the approval of the Archiepiscopal authority. His Holiness commissions me to express to you his approval of the object with which you have been inspired in the execution and publication of that work, so full of interest" etc.

Miracles will never cease; the Pope had sanctioned a preface extolling the reading of the Scriptures, and had also given his countenance to a popular translation of a portion of the New Testament.

The Gospels, thus recommended, obtained a ready sale; edition followed edition, till the twenty-fifth appeared. Probably one hundred thousand copies were sold, at four francs each. Not as cheap tracts, but as valuable books which are sure to be preserved, had the Gospels entered many French families, under the sanction of the Pope.

Suddenly "the Sacred Congregation" discovered that an error had been committed, and a decree was issued from the Apostolic Palace of the Vatican, with the approval of "Our Most Holy Lord, Pope Leo III", condemning the translation of Henri Lasserre, to be placed on the index of forbidden books. An infallible benediction was removed to make room for an equally infallible malediction in the space of twelve months and fifteen days. The book has been withdrawn from circulation; but no hand can gather up all the copies, or destroy the good which must have come from their perusal. As for M. Henri Lasserre, he deserves our sympathy, and he should be the object of the prayers of all who rejoice in Gospel light, that on him the fulness of truth and grace may dawn.

This very wonderful story is set forth at length, with all the documents, by our friend, Dr. William Wright, of the Bible Society; and those who invest a shilling in the purchase of his pamphlet, which is published by Nisbet, will do well to keep the document. Hereafter, it will be produced full many a time as the clearest possible demonstration that the Pope is not infallible - proof which must tell upon even a Catholic mind. We hear the pamphlet is to be sown broadcast over Italy, and it will be good seed.

The stopping of the sale of the Gospels may turn out to be for the furtherance of the truth. Let our readers think of it and rejoice - it is true that a Milan newspaper is daily issuing the Gospels in numbers. It will be a charming novel for the Italians. Hundreds of thousands will read the story of our Lord's life and death, and the Lord will make it to them as a voice from Heaven. Courage, brethren! God is confounding His enemies, winning wanderers, and visiting His people! - C.H.S.
Rome's Arrogant (Im)Morality
In the light of the sexual misconduct of many of her clergy it is blatantly hypocritical for the Mother of Harlots to say anything about morality.
Rev. J.C. Kyle Paisley

The arrogance of the Church of Rome knows no bounds. This arrogance is nowhere more manifest than in the field of morals. In a new Vatican handbook published by the Pontifical Council for the Family, the Papacy urges her priests to treat couples using contraception with "mercy, discretion and respect", while at the same time claiming that the Church's ban on contraception is a "definite and unreformable doctrine". The publication insists that Roman Catholics admitting to their "sin" should have absolution, even if they "sin" repeatedly. One proviso is that upon confession there must be a commitment "not to fall again into sin".

In the light of the sexual misconduct of many of her clergy it is blatantly hypocritical for the Mother of Harlots to say anything about morality.

It seems that because of increased disillusionment amongst her adherents over the misbehaviour of priests, and because of falling church attendance, Rome is prepared to do anything to claw back lost ground.

What is the ordinary individual to think about a system which on the one hand reaffirms a 'principle' and on the other hand prostitutes this 'principle' by promising forgiveness to those who continually flout it?

The Scarlet Woman stands self-condemned, and all her claims to inerrancy are proved a farce. She has nothing to offer her people but that which will "make empty the soul of the hungry" (Isa. 32:6). Satisfaction and salvation are in the Lord Jesus alone, "who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and satisfaction and redemption" (I Cor. 1:30). Faith in an unfailing Christ, not in a destitute Church, brings peace.
The Doctrine of Infallibility
It is clear that Papal pretensions to infallibility are arrogant and blasphemous.
Rev. J.C. Kyle Paisley

The doctrine of infallibility is to be rejected for the following reasons:

1. Romanists have contradicted each other in their zeal to defend their doctrines against the criticisms of Protestantism. Di Bruno (Catholic Belief)affirms that the Pope, apart from the bishops, is infallible, stating: "Some people wrongly imagine that this dogma is new. […] They might, with as much show or reason, assert that the dogma which teaches the existence of a personal God is a new dogma." On the other hand, Keenan (The Controversial Catechism) declares that to say Catholics believe the Pope to be infallible is "a Protestant invention, and no article of the Catholic faith, […] for no decision of his can oblige, unless it be received and enforced by the bishops of the Church."

2. The idea of Papal infallibility is open to be rejected because of its late addition into Roman dogma. Claims of infallibility were first made in the eleventh century, Pope Gregory being one of the first to assume it. Although the idea was affirmed by the Council of Trent some five centuries later, there was no clear determination on the matter until the Vatican Council of 1870. Prior to this there were four difference opinions. The Jesuits and Italian bishops held that infallibility was vested in the Pope. The French bishops held that it was the Church councils that were infallible. A third party held that the infallibility was in both Pope and councils. A fourth party held that it was vested in the Church as a whole. The development of the concept of 'infallibility' contradicts its very use, because it suggests uncertainty. The idea that any man or system suddenly realises that it is unerring, after long years of argument, shows how fallacious the claims of infallibility are.

3. Infallibility is to be rejected because the very Council that is said to have determined upon it was not unanimous. One would have expected unanimity in an infallible Church, but this was not the case. At the outset of the Vatican Council of 1870, 410 bishops petitioned in favour of the dogma and 162 against. When the vote was being taken, those opposed to the dogma absented themselves from the Council, and the decree was accordingly passed.

4. Papal infallibility is to be rejected because it is a convenience and not a truth. The successful passing of the dogma at the Vatican Council is credited mainly to the Jesuits. This order was particularly partial to the idea of the personal infallibility of the Pope, but they secured, by a brief dated October, 1836, that the Pope virtually resigned himself and the Church to their control; so, because it was easier for them to manage one than a multitude of individual bishops, it was their purpose to have infallibility lodged in one man, that man being the Pope.

5. This dogma is further to be repudiated because of its inconsistency with the Creed of Pope Pius IV, which is an official summary of the Roman faith. The creed requires the Romanist to receive all things delivered by the general councils of the Church, one of which, the Council of Constance, declared that the Pope is subject to the councils of the Church in matters of faith - a thing which could not be if infallibility is vested in himself.

6. Protestants reject the notion of Papal infallibility because there is no substantiation for it in the words of Christ. Romanists have attempted to base their reasoning on the words of Christ to Peter (whom they claim to be the first Pope) in Matthew 16:18: "I say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." However, there is not one word here with regard to the Pope or infallibility. Rather, there is the anticipation of Roman error, for in the same chapter Peter is proved most fallible indeed. Immediately after the promise he fell into error, rebuking Christ as He spoke of the necessity of His death (Matthew 16:21-23).

7. With infallibility we might have expected an unflinching loyalty to the truth, but this is not to be found in the Papacy. Pope Liberius was an Arian, denying the deity of Christ,, Pope Honorius was a Monothelite, denying the deity of Christ and His real humanity. Pope Boniface denies the doctrine of the Trinity. Popes John XII, Benedict IX,,, John XXIII and Alexander VI were guilty of some of the worst depravities. Cardinal Baronius declared that many Popes were "monsters of iniquity". Yet the Vatican pronounces them all infallible.

It is clear that Papal pretensions to infallibility are arrogant and blasphemous. By these the Pope proves himself to be that Antichrist spoken of in the Word of God, that "man of sin" and "son of perdition", who "opposes and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God" (II Thes. 2:3-4).
Rome - Unchanged and Unchanging
The Roman Catholic hierarchy's public humiliation and disciplining of the Irish Republic's President Mary McAleese for participating in a Church of Ireland Holy Communion service in Dublin on December 7, 1997, has exposed the unchanged and unchanging character of the Church of Rome since the Dark Ages.
Professor Arthur Noble

"Passing commitments to Churches," writes 'Monsignor' Denis Faul in his Belfast Telegraph article of [recent article], "are no more acceptable than passing affairs with women or men. A Catholic person taking communion in another Church is like a married person committing adultery."

Regardless of the hypocrisy of a Church hierarchy which moralises about alleged adultery while itself being plagued with paedophilia, the assault on the religious freedom of the Eire President not only unmasks the sham of Rome's overtures to other Churches, but also reminds us that the false dogma involved in this controversy - that of transubstantiation - is nowhere to be found in the Bible.

1. False Overtures

The shameless authoritarian interference by the Roman hierarchy confirms that even in this enlightened 20th century the Church of Rome has never abandoned or even weakened her historical claim to dominion over all other Churches and the political State itself. It is proof that behind the modern fancy dress disguise of ecumenism with its attendant euphemisms of 'reconciliation', 'dialogue', 'church unity' and 'bridge-building' - all cunningly devised to lure her 'separated brethren' unsuspectingly into her fold - lurks the familiar old hag, the Great Whore of Revelation, unswervingly and unashamedly true to her motto 'semper eadem', 'always the same'.

In this regard, Faul is still true to the presumptuous arrogance of Pope Leo I, who at the Council of Ephesus in 449 first claimed authority over Church and State as a divine right. The Popes subsequently grew in power, wealth and pride until they claimed universal dominion over Church and State through the world. From that time, Kings and Emperors were crowned, deposed and degraded at the pleasure of these pompous Bishops of Rome.

A notable example from English history was the dispute over the appointment of Stephen Langton as Archbishop of Canterbury, when King John (1199-1216) was made to kneel before the Pope's legate, and his crown was ignominiously kicked from his head. One of the meanest of his retainers was made to retrieve it, before he handed it back to the King in token of England's being a vassalage of the Papacy, with a tribute of 1,000 marks a year as the infamous "Mary's Dowry". King John was forced by a Papal interdict to submit to the Papacy, and so-called Papal 'authorisation' was given to Philip of France to invade England.

The whole of British history records repeated struggles between the Crown and the Vatican, culminating in the supremacy of the former in 1688 and the subsequent safeguarding of this country against Papal despotism through the provisions of the Bill of Rights and the Coronation Oath.
Let The True Church Of The Papacy Stand Up!
Has Rome changed today or remained "semper eadem"?
Professor Arthur Noble

"Our absolutist system, supported by the Inquisition, the strictest censorship, the suppression of all literature, the privileged exemption of the clergy, and arbitrary power of bishops, cannot endure any other than absolutist governments." - Dollinger: The Pope and the Council, London 1861, p. 23.

"No civil government, be it a monarchy, an aristocracy, a democracy ... can be a wise, just, efficient, or durable government, governing for the good of the community, with the Catholic Church; and without the papacy there is and can be no Catholic Church." - Dr Brownson, 19th-century Roman Catholic journalist, quoted in his Brownson's Quarterly Review, January, 1873, vol. 1, p. 10.

Has Rome changed today or remained "semper eadem"?

Stunned by the staggering growth of evangelical 'sects' in Brazil, leaders of the Roman Catholic Church have threatened to launch a 'holy war' against Protestants unless they stop leading people from the Catholic fold. At the 31st National Conference of the Bishops of Brazil, Bishop Sinesion called evangelicals a serious threat to the Vatican's influence in his country. "We will declare a holy war; don't doubt it. The Catholic Church has a ponderous structure, but when we move, we'll smash anyone beneath us." - Peter de Rosa: Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side of the Papacy. Crown Publishing Inc., 1988, p. 194.

"Jesus is alive on our altars, as offering. We become one with Christ in the Eucharist. ... As Catholics we have Mary, and that Mom of ours, Queen of Paradise, is praying for us till she sees us in glory. As Catholics we have the papacy, a history of popes from Peter to John Paul II. ... We have the rock upon which Christ did build His Church. ... As Catholics - now I love this one - we have purgatory. Thank God! I'm one of those people who would never get to the Beatific Vision without it. It's the only way to go. ... So as Catholics ... our job is to use this remaining decade evangelizing everyone we can into the Catholic Church, into the body of Christ and into the third millennium of Catholic history." - "Father" Tom Forrest, quoted in "Roman Catholic Doubletalk at Indianapolis '90", Foundation, July-August 1990.

"While the state has some rights, she has them only in virtue and by permission of the superior authority ... [...] of the Church." - The Catholic World, July 1870, vol. xi, p. 439.
The Mass: 'This is my body'
Why do you as a Protestant not believe the words of Christ, Who in blessing the elements at the Last Supper said: "This is my body"?
Rev. J.C. Kyle Paisley

Protestants accept the words of Christ wholeheartedly and repudiate the false construction put upon them by the Church of Rome. We do not believe that the bread and wine are really, truly and substantially changed into the body, blood, soul, Deity, "bones and sinews of Christ" (Council of Trent).

We repudiate Rome's error because of her hypocrisy. She rejects the Bible as the sole rule of faith, but at the same time claims an infallible interpretation of it and makes this interpretation one of the basic tenets of her religion.

Jesus Christ also said: "This cup is the New Testament in my blood." (I Cor. 11:25) Why does Rome not teach, if she is to be consistent, that the chalice becomes the New Testament?

Protestants also reject Roman error because of its absurdity. If we are to literalise Christ's words here, then what are we to do with similar Scriptures? For example, when Christ said: "I am the door", consistency demands the interpretation that he had four panels, a handle and a keyhole. In John 15:1 Jesus says: "I am the vine." Does this mean that His arms were branches and yielded grapes? The Saviour is called the "Rock" in I Cor. 10:4. Does this mean that he is a solid stone? Isaiah 40:6 says: "All flesh is grass", but a human being would have to be green if this were taken literally.

Further, Christ said of the cup: "This cup is the new testament in my blood" (Luke 22:20 and I Cor. 11:25). Why does Rome not teach, if she is to be consistent, that the chalice becomes the New Testament in the mass?

(1) Is this God working, or is it a repackaging of Roman ecumenism?
Rome's blasphemy. The teaching of Rome has also to be rejected because of its blasphemy. If the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Christ, then He makes himself the prey of cannibals. The purpose, as well as the implications, of Romish doctrine, is blasphemous too. It is supposed necessary to re-create Christ in order to re-offer Him. Both are not only impossible, but unnecessary. Christ's sacrifice is finished, and the Scriptures declare (Rom. 6:9): "Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him."

Back to Top


Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top


Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

http://www.ianpaisley.org
Email: eips_info@yahoo.co.uk
Return to EIPS Main Menu

Back to Top

http://www.ianpaisley.org
Email: eips_info@yahoo.co.uk
Return to EIPS Main Menu

Back to Top

http://www.ianpaisley.org
Email: eips_info@yahoo.co.uk
Return to EIPS Main Menu